User talk:Ged UK

patrol bot reminder

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

Bubble tea!

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Kyal Marsh

I don't know how to talk to you otherwise Re Kyal Marsh. But Charlotte Jackson goes to Aberdeen University so I think that student newspaper is a reliable source, surely? It is also still something written on the Kyal Marsh website. I go to Aberdeen Uni too and have met Charlotte, we have mutual friends. I think if I was Kyal's girlfriend I wouldn't be too happy that you were trying to say she might not be his girlfriend anymore...she's moving out to Melbourne once she graduates in September so they are clearly serious. Why won't you accept the sources I provide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.35.169 (talk) 14:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. Firstly, i had no idea that she went there, so that does make it more relevant. Is that newspaper published online? Could you provide me with a link to the info on Kyal's site, that would be better, to be honest. --GedUK  14:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

You must have wondered why Aberdeen University newspaper would randomly be talking about her haha, sorry I should have made that clearer. It is not online but I do have a copy of it which I could send you although that is not particularly relevant when you are needing a source for this! The link on his website is this http://www.kyalmarsh.com/biography.html

No problem. You don't need to send it to me! Just give me as much info as you can, what issue is it (volume, or date something like that), page number, author (if known), that kinda stuff. I'll add the website link as well. Cheers :) --GedUK  15:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Just having a look now. It was the issue that went out on 18th March 2009, page 4 in the Arts section in an article titled "It Just Keeps Getting Better And Better And Better...". Hope that's enough! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.35.169 (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done --GedUK  15:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Recall

Hi there! I notice that you're open to recall. I was wondering if you had your own process mapped out, as I'm drafting mine out (somewhat prematurely as my RfA hasn't quite finished yet!) and I've lots of respect for you as a writer of articles. --GedUK 08:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Mine's rather permissive, as far as recall goes—if there's an RfC about me or an ArbCom case in which I'm a party and any uninvolved editors have serious issues, I stand for recall. User:David_Fuchs/usr/ub/recall --Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 13:52, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, that's a take I'd not considered. Certainly less procedural than others. Thanks! --GedUK  14:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck! (Sorry for the crosspost)--Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 14:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and no problem. :) --GedUK  14:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations and see you around. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:50, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) --GedUK  15:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Congrats new admin!

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

— Rlevse • Talk • 14:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --GedUK  15:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Congrats! Now, here is your Admin shirt, now get to work ;-) SoWhy 15:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. I just messaged you on your page too, feel free to ignore now :) --GedUK  15:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

And from me. I hope you felt my mental support. RfA can be quite an ego boost, can't it? :)
Cheers, Amalthea 16:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I did :) Yes, indeed it can when it goes well! --GedUK  16:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! Use the tools well and yes, thank you, for making my first nomination such a success. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:45, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Btw, you might want to check some people's monobooks like mine for some handy new scripts that you might find useful as admin (EasyBlock for example is quite useful^^). Regards SoWhy 16:59, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

IRC Admin request

For RJD0060 --GedUK  15:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Reel Brazil Film Festival

Hi Ged,

I was including text on the Reel Brazil Film Fetsival. I used the same text that was on my website, but had it deleted, by you due to copyright issues. Could you please review it because I am the one who wrote the text, therefore there shouldn't be any issues with posting it on wikipedia.

Cheers,

Greenavocado

Hi there. Unfortunately, we can't just take your word for it, we would still be in breach of copyright law.

• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at with a link to where we can find that note.

Also, please don't use wikipedia to promote your festival, or it will keep getting deleted. If the festival is notable, please explain why, but not details of how to enter, screening info etc, as that is advertising. Thanks. --GedUK  22:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Mirror's Edge 2

Regarding the page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirrors_Edge_2

The copyright infringement is that it is an unauthorized derivative work. Looking at, for example, US copyright law, the content in the page constitutes a work based upon an existing work (the Mirror's Edge videogame), which recasts, transforms, and adapts portions of that work (e.g. characters, plot, setting). This makes it a derivative work. Making derivative works is an infringement of the copyright on the underlying work. Take a look at 17 USC 101 and 106(2). I'd be shocked if most other countries didn't have similar provisions in their copyright laws.

Outright reproduction is not the only form of infringing activity. This is why, for example, fanfic web sites can get shut down if the copyright holder is feeling obnoxious toward their fan base.

Frankly, I chose that particular rationale because it is indisputable. Since it's totally fictional, I was initially going to go with the patent nonsense one, but since the page is at least coherent (though really nothing more than fanfic or wishful thinking that doesn't belong on Wikipedia) I figured that the copyright rationale would work better, even if it wasn't really the best reason in light of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.9.205 (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Whilst derivative work is an infringement of copyright law, it's generally felt that a plot description is fair use, and thus not a breach. As such, I didn't feel that it was a blatant breach, and thus failing to meet the criteria for speedy deletion. I believe that the article has now been marked for PROD, ie it will be deleted in 5 days if the notice is not removed. --GedUK  08:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Deleted tsunomix via A7 "No indication that the article may meet guidelines for inclusion"

Tsunomix Response

Hello! First and foremost, thanks for keepiing Wikipedia clean! I appreciate your efforts just as much as all the other users. I feel you might be mistaken in accusing me of spam or "advertising." I followed through in reviewing the notability page and article seven. I believe I have indicated how Tsunomix is noteable and signifigant. I described in this article, "The overall goal is to promote team work and financial responsibility among fellow Americans." Then I described innovative community led techniques which are unique to tsunomix. This article is not a promotion for tsunomix but a noteable description of an innovative community which avidly seek to improve their financial situation. I even made reference to facebook, myspace, and linkedin as other community models which support similiar techniques. I am open to any suggestions, however I feel I have covered all general requirements of notability and should not have been deleted. Eagerly awaiting your response!

Sincerely,

Elias Haddad feel free to email mr.eliashaddad@gmail.com

Hi there, thanks for messaging. Firstly, I didn't delete the article for spam, though that is what it was tagged for. I deleted it under criteria A7, as I didn't feel that there was anything within the article that asserted why this organisation was notable. The models it uses may well be notable, but there was no indication that the organisation itself is. If you wish, I can restore the article to your userspace for you to work on further, and I will be happy to advise you on ways to strengthen it. Also, sorry for the delay in responding, but my internet connection gave up last night. --GedUK  08:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure GEDUk sounds reasonable to me. You do not need to post it back; i have a copy i'll be working on. I would very much appreciate your feedback on the next post. I will make you aware when its back up, unless you have it on your watch list. Thanks for the response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsunomix (talk • contribs) 19:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, but let me know when you want me to have a look at it. Don't just repost it or it may get deleted again. I won't be watching the page, I've too much on my watch list already! --GedUK  19:12, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Help

Please help [1]. 100% all edits by this IP is reverts, edit war and vulgarity. He is not to improve. Please, block for him - blocked indefinitely for repeated vandalism. LUCPOL (talk) 18:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Blocked but further vandalism (personal attack and trolling) by him [2]. Please, block for him - blocked indefinitely for repeated vandalism. LUCPOL (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Again: [3]. Please semi-block my page user, anty editions by IP. LUCPOL (talk) 21:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done Semi-protected temporarily. If it needs doing in the future, you can go to WP:RPP. --GedUK  21:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ged UK. You have new messages at The Wandering Traveler's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Ged UK. You have new messages at Oren0's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Aww man no fair lol.

Darn you xP you meany head deleted my page within seconds lol. You said it didn't meet criteria, if you thought that way why didn't you HELP ME! I'm newwww! =( This place sucks >.< it's no fair, i spent so much time and just to be rejected so quickly, you guys are evil!! Evvvvvvvvvvillll!! Sorry, not trying to spam you or something or hate message you lol i'm just upset =(

oh right signature right? lol idk what im doing xD --TheTruth011 (talk) 21:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

You'll have to help me, which article was it? It can be restored to your userspace if you like. Let me know. --GedUK  21:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

ummm umm umm uhh lol. well it was on/off. lol xD hot japanese boy band hehe >.< —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTruth011 (talk • contribs) 21:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll restore it to your userspace. You need to make sure you indicate why they are notable (singles on the chart, tours etc). --GedUK  21:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Oooookay lol thanksies, but um im still confused lol. im new, as in new today so im still very confused as to what to do >.> but im trying! is there someway i can get some help? --TheTruth011 (talk) 21:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure, just put {{helpme}} on your talk page, and someone will come along to help :) I'll give you a proper welcome message too, lots of links that will help on there. --GedUK  21:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

lol yay! thats good right? hehe xD thank you --TheTruth011 (talk) 21:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Ron

Thank you Ged.I'd like the 18.58 post of today to stand.Semi-protection?This vandal has already used the IDs Prof Homerton & Dr Hugh Janus. Do you have his IP address?Ron Broxted (talk) 21:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC).

I've protected your user pagae for 3 days. Hopefully that will be long enough. --GedUK  21:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Duly noted and with much thanks.My only suspicion is that it will be nowhere near long enough.This saddo has been "trying to get me" for a while.Hopefully they have slit their own throat as I'm trying to track them down (legally). Once again Ta!Ron Broxted (talk) 21:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC).

Wikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

• From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
• Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
• News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Evenmoremotor

Hi there. I saw your message this morning at User talk:Evenmoremotor about his insistence on adding the attack speedy to criminal articles. I pointed out this to him earlier yesterday, but the message was removed from his talk page so I wasn't sure if you'd seen it. Anyway, I've declined two more speedies that he had tagged. Thought I ought to let you know. Cheers --GedUK  08:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I had not seen that actually. This user is really a curious case, not sure what the user's angle is. I think we may have actually declined the same CSDs, and I'm assuming it was accidental that you reverted my other changes to the pages as well? [4] [5]. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you'd remove a reference I added and reinstate an unsourced section about a person's penis. Oren0 (talk) 17:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Errr, I can't work those out either. Sorry, i must have gone odd for a few minutes there. Anyway, he seems to be taking BLP very much to heart, and it's hard to criticise him for that. Hopefully our combined messages will get through. --GedUK  17:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

This user has deleted our messages from their User Talk and continued to mark pages for deletion. I'm really not sure how to get this to stop so I've opened up an ANI thread on the issue if you're interested in chiming in. Oren0 (talk) 06:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The Treble

Hi Ged, I seem to be in a content dispute on this article where a user reverted my extensive edits and gave very little reason for their reversion. I'm not keen to start an edit war so I have not reverted back yet. Although, I fully intend to restore many of my perfectly good edits. Also, the other user is trying to muddy the waters by accusing me of introducing OR (which was already in the article) and making false accusations. I'd really like your opinion on this as I have had various disagreements in the past with this user and I could easily get a bit over the top here. Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 09:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. I've had disagreements with this user in the past as well, so I'm probably not the best person to ask. Whilst I've not edited this article, I have come across it with its links to the Liverpool Treble, so I don't think that I could call myself an involved admin either. I would suggest that you as for comments from WP:Footy in the first instance. --GedUK  10:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. That's probably a good call. I've done some extensive research and I've got some big new proposals for the page. This should ultimately solve the linking problems we've been having. We'll see how things go. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 20:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Block lengths

Hehm I should either stop or make a FAQ, because everyone is asking me these times! :D It's a bit of a joke, but the real reason is to have a block length longer than a year (I'm always surprised by the number of blocks we reset each September...), the rest is just for the show. That way, the school blocks never expire when school terms start :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 11:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Btw I blocked 212.219.63.204 (talk · contribs) since it's a school IP (I'm more lenient on warnings there if there's no useful contributions, and "enough" vandalism in the past month to warrant a block). I hope you don't mind :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 13:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No, that's fine. I'm still being careful with IP blocks; over-careful perhaps. --GedUK  13:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No worries, patrolling AIV is a good way to start learning the ropes :) A few thoughts: if you can skip block templates on IPs, don't hesitate to tag users. That way their userpage gets deleted if the block is indef, or other users that interact with them know they are blocked. And I try to block IPs for shorter times if I think they might be shared, that way you get less complaints from people wondering why the hell they are blocked when the IP gets assigned to someone else. -- lucasbfr ^talk 14:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify; i needn't worry too much about block templates on IP addresses, but need to make sure they're on logged in users? That's fine, i can do that! --GedUK  14:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

That's my opinion (well, tagging IPs is good when you're using a template such as {{anonblock}} or {{schoolblock}} is a good practice, but I don't bother when blocking a residential IP for vandalism) -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, if I'm at home with Firefox, I can use the block plugin, which blocks and applies the template at the same time. At work on IE, I can't, so I ave to remember to do it manually where necessary. Seems reasonable! --GedUK  10:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Chanchai Likitjitta

I deleted the page, hope you don't mind. It was a 1:1 copy of th:ชาญชัย ลิขิตจิตถะ and as such a valid A2. A tip: If you find non-english pages tagged, select some phrases and do a quick Google search. If they are on another project, Google usually finds it. Regards SoWhy 12:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No, that's fine. My biggest problem doing this at work is that my browser doesn't render foreign characters very well, if at all, so it's difficult for me to tell what results I get back. Cheers :) --GedUK  12:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Regulation

Thanks for speedly deleting Regulation. Could you also delete the talk page: Talk:Regulation while you're at it? — Blue-Haired Lawyer 17:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done Sorry, had brain fade there. --GedUK  17:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers — Blue-Haired Lawyer 17:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

AIV

Hey, Ged. Just a quick note; reports on AIV are considered stale if the user hasn't edited in several hours or days, so anything less than that is usually considered valid. Not a big deal, though. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah OK, cool. I'll bear that in mind :) --GedUK  20:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, several hours might not be stale; several days is certainly stale. Where have you seen otherise, Julian? KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, if an account has only made a few edits—both of which were 18 hours ago—I'd probably consider it stale. –Juliancolton ^Talk · ^Review 13:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Cimbrian Language Redirect

Hi, I was wondering why you deleted the uppercase L redirect for Cimbrian language, I wasn't sure about the reasoning you put, but I don't think R3 would have fit if that's what you meant. The incorrect and common spelling error is why I made the redirect. Spinach Monster (talk) 23:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

It's unneccesary. The software copes perfectly well with capitals at the starts of words. Type in Cimbrian Language into the search box and press 'Go' and it will take you straight to Cimbrian language, thus the redirect isn't necessary. --GedUK  07:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Now I see. Thanks. Spinach Monster (talk) 11:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

AIV

Um, am I missing something? Why do you report a vandal to AIV before you block them? If i come across a vandal, I block them without going to AIV, is that a mistake? --GedUK  08:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Just not used to only reverting and not revert+warn (that automatically submits a report to AIV) after a final warning yet sorry - I will try to keep it in mind. Camw (talk) 08:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't a criticism, it's no skin off anybody's nose really (except the AIV helperbots, but they don't have skin, or noses), I just thought I might be in the wrong! --GedUK  08:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, still a habit that I should try to get out of! (I don't want to annoy the bots prior to them rising up against us ;) ). Camw (talk) 08:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

You can disable auto-reporting in HG's options. -- Mentifisto 12:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

PP-tags

Things to know #882476614: When adding a {{pp-xxx}} tag to a template, always remember to put it in <noinclude></noinclude> tags, otherwise it will be transcluded and then those pages will show up in Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates.

PS: Use {{RFPP|f}} instead of {{RFPP|f|indefinite}} when protecting pages without expiry. Regards SoWhy 09:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, yes, sorry. That was my first template protect. I usually stay well away from templates, far too complicated coding-wise. --GedUK  10:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

ged likes penis =)

1 0 0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.51.32 (talk • contribs) 10.15 25 March 2009 (UTC)

AIV

It would appear that you and I share similar dispositions on processing AIV reports. All too often administrators are -IMHO- a bit too quick to issue long-duration blocks, so it is nice to see another admin who feels that that following the process is good. Kudos to you, sir! — Kralizec! (talk) 11:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

heh, thanks :) --GedUK  19:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Devendra Prabhudesai

Hey Ged. Your close of this AfD indicates that the coverage is of the author's books and not the author. But if the works are notable so is the author. Furthermore, as there are no articles on the books, this substantial coverage is lost unless it is appropriately combined in an article on the author where the book titles can be redirected. Would you consider relisting to clarify the consensus? ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree that the notability of books always passes to authors. I didn't make reference to the notability of his books in the close; that shouldn't have been part of the discussion. I think the consensus you are searching for would be better discussed at the Notability talk pages. --GedUK  17:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Understood. I'm going to file a deletion review request. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

"Tsunomix Re-post" on my discussion page

I reposted the page you took down, you claimed the organization profile was not notable enough. I made changes. Can you please go to my discussion page an criticize the article. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsunomix (talk • contribs) 17:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC) thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsunomix (talk • contribs) 20:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

You banned my account,Lithium72990, for vandalism but I don't get why. What did I vandalize? --97.97.160.121 (talk) 01:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Lithium, please don't resort to personal attacks in the future, as you did here ("idiot") and here ("moron"). If you find yourself in a dispute and can't work it out, seek dispute resolution.
In any case, Ged, I just saw this fly by ANI and wanted to point out, for the future, that you aren't really supposed to decline unblock requests for blocks you issued yourself, but let an uninvolved admin review it instead. This one should be getting plenty of reviews in any case, I assume, now that it is at ANI.
Cheers, Amalthea 10:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, OK, my bad. --GedUK  17:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

False Accusations by Lithium72990

The user Dumaka has been editing these two articles to support his dislike of the entertainer. Notably was his revisions to the entertainer's article where he revereted a legitimate revision to another one which included the line " Next album = "Carol City Correctional - Represent". That of course is not the entertainer's next album, yet Dumaka purposely reverted it to contain the line. A quick glance over his contributions should show his agenda is trying to disrupt articles associated with this entertainer.--97.97.160.121 (talk) 04:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

: The article is Deeper Than Rap. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

:This is the IP address of Lithium72990 (talk · contribs · count), who i blocked for messing about with AIV reports. I have just shortened his block on appeal, and told him not to use this IP address, though that was after this was posted. --GedUK  08:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

::This is not true. Everything I have post about this entertainer has been fact and NPOV. Everything Lithium as posted has been bias in support of this artist. The reason he is accussing me of this is because he doesn't like the truths I'm placing into the article. You can check the logs. " Next album = "Carol City Correctional - Represent". I didn't even make this edit. 98.14.64.86 did this edit.Dumaka (talk) 12:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why this individual feels he has to continue harrassing me but I don't like to be accussed of something I didn't do Dumaka (talk) 12:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Aabir AfD

You declined the speedy tag on Aabir, so I have nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aabir. You can see my reasons for believing it is a hoax there. KuroiShiroi (talk) 18:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

The speedy is for blatant hoaxes, which i didn't feel this one was. AfD is exactly the place to discuss it. --GedUK  18:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was pretty blatant with the reviews and all, but it's fine by me. Yes, more eyes on this would probably be a good thing. Sorry for the trouble. KuroiShiroi (talk) 18:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it :) --GedUK  19:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Semi protection of Shibdas Ghosh Page

Dear Admin, you kept the edits made by the IP users when you blocked the page. I request you to revert the page to the state that was agreed by two editors and vandalised by the IP editor and block there after. Now by blocking it, you served the purpose of the IP vandal. Please do the needful.--Radhakrishnansk (talk) 10:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Please look at the talk page as well.220.227.207.32 (talk) 10:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

You're a logged in editor, you can revert the changes yourself. Also, I'm not an expert on the subject, so for me to make the edits would be pointless. --GedUK  10:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

While semi-protecting the article, did you assume that the anonymous users are edit warring and logged in ones are protecting the policies? There was a discussion going on in the talk page not a single 3RR violation.220.227.207.32 (talk) 12:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Tumi (business)

Dear Ged UK,

I do not like to make frivolous admin requests. I requested deletion of the redirect Tumi (business) because:

1. There is more than one business named Tumi, as listed on the Tumi disambiguation page.

2. There is only one business specifically named Tumi Inc..

3. Articles no longer link to Tumi (business).

Given that there are multiple business with the name Tumi, why should Tumi (business) redirect to Tumi Inc.? If anything, it should redirect to the Tumi disambiguation page, which is rather redundant, since the whole reason for the disambiguation page is to properly direct Tumi-related inquiries, since multiple entities containing the name "Tumi" are out there.

If Tumi (business) redirect cannot be deleted in spite of the above points, then what is your reason for keeping it?

Many thanks, --Lmbstl (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2009 (UTC)