Here are some links I thought useful:
Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. Wikipedia:About, Wikipedia:Help desk, and Wikipedia:Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.
(Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 13:36, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not overly fussed about those articles listed on VfD. They were added when I was still quite new around here and in an inclusionist state of mind. We'll see how they go. They're probably better suited as redirects anyway. Thanks for helping keep the wiki clean. :) -- Longhair | Talk 01:07, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hi Allen,
Regarding Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/X-play, I thought I should follow up on your comment regarding Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Although normally second and subsequent words in a title are lowercase, an exception is made for proper nouns: Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Lowercase_second_and_subsequent_words. In the case of X-Play the show's formal name includes the capital P, thus our article title should too.
Cheers, --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 15:48, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Exactly, Allen :) I posted some similar information in JeremyA's talk page a few days ago, and I added it as footnote 3 on the article. Do you think that information should be moved into the article itself? *hugs!* - Shauri 14:47, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I don't think it's a particularly good idea to have black text on a black background. You might want to change the color of the text to white or something. Mgm|(talk) 21:33, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
Have we stopped using 'substub'? I'd marked a one-line article as a substub, and I notice that you've re-marked it a stub. (This isn't a complaint, I just need to know for the future.) Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:37, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Daedalus_%28fictional_inventor%29 isn't about the mythical character Daedalus, but a fictional inventor. I switched the stub back. --Kross 03:34, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
I had marked 2 articles (Irakli Alasania and Glomerulitis) as substubs, each approximately 1 sentence long, and then noticed you marked them as stubs. тəzєті
Hi Allen. I see you regularly popping up on my watchlist, keeping Peer Review tidy by archiving old and gone-to-FAC requests. You get a sunflower of thanks for your help in making Peer Review work like a well-oiled machine. Keep up the good work! — mark ✎ 12:32, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi Allen - I just saw your note to the creator of the Inca-stubs. Looks remarkably like some of my comments to stub creators... do I spot a copy-vio? ;) Grutness|hello? 23:19, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The article Basalt fiber is not a stub, so please do not categorize it as a stub. It is "about a specific mineral, mineraloid, or type of rock" but isn't a stub. If the Stub sorting project hasn't come up with a way to categorize substubs, I encourage them to do so, as it is very important to consider whether an article is stub or substub. --Randy 20:44, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There seems to be a missing image, news.png, on the news-stub - DavidWBrooks 14:27, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am asking for help as I am running out of options. User:Viriditas is continually reverting almost everything I do, and refusing to discuss it on the talk page. I don't know how to respond to this, because he simply won't explain what he is doing. It looks to me like he is pushing a pretty extreme agenda at the expense of other points of view, but I'm willing to try to see it from the other side. In the past you've commented on this issue, and I need your help if you have a few minutes. Thank you, Guttlekraw3 06:15, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for straightening this out. Typical newbie error. Another couple of years, and maybe I'll stop making them. Dandrake 06:50, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
..for fixing the mess I made with the WP:WSS/C shortcut. I must get a better browser (one that doesn't limit me to 32k of editing...) Grutness...wha? 13:32, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Nice work finding a better stub category, but I'm wondering if this really should be a stub at all. It's certainly short enough, but marking it as a stub implies there's more to write about it. Long Island Sound is quite extensive; this is really just a glorified redirect to that article, with an explanation of where the name came from. Maybe it makes sense to just drop the stub tag completely? --RoySmith 17:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Any interest in becoming an admin? You do a lot of good work and certainly seem trustworthy. I usually like to see more community involvement, but I think you have enough to show you are level headed an conscientious. With your ok I will nominate you. Once I do, go to the nomination, accept, and provide some responses to the questions. - Taxman Talk 20:22, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, you are welcome. As you may have discerned the reason you didn't get more overwhelming support is the lack of community involvement. But no matter, as long as you follow the relevant guidelines you'll be fine. - Taxman Talk July 1, 2005 15:04 (UTC) You're quite welcome! --Merovingian (t) (c) July 1, 2005 15:16 (UTC)
When I was in the bus on my way back home, I remembered I forgot to replace all the {{peerreview}} tags on talkpages with {{oldpeerreview}}. I was glad to see you cleaned up behind me and spared me the the tedious job, not to mention the humiliation I could have faced. In recognition of this, I award you a mouldy sandwich. Enjoy! - Mgm|(talk) 15:59, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
Are you sure about this? I am not aware of any such policy. Guettarda 17:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The image on the rum page was marked "fair old". That's ususally not a reason to remove it from the page. However if you have reason to believe the image is under copyright, perhaps you could list it on WP:PUI. If not perhaps you could put it back Zeimusu | (Talk page) July 1, 2005 03:41 (UTC)
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 1 July 2005 15:25 (UTC)
Thank you for helping me sort stubs in Aesthetics. I'm still somewhat new to Wikipedia and I am stupified by all the many templates, especially those for stubs. --Slac 2 July 2005 16:32 (UTC)
Thanks. I was thinking that the Origins section could read a little better. Anyway, the article overall is very good and I think it definently deserves FA status. ike9898 July 3, 2005 00:05 (UTC)
This should be deleted too, since Scotchguard Powered Bong is gone too (thanks to you, I guess). See Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Scotchgard_bong. Thanks Rangek July 6, 2005 05:14 (UTC)
If you would like, you might want to look at my monobook.js for some ideas on how to speed up the tedious process of closing VfD's. – ABCD 7 July 2005 00:18 (UTC) (by the way, keep up the good work! :-) )
Hiya, you recently closed the vfd Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Matthew 1:verses
In your calculation of votes you state that the votes are
19 Merge votes, 16 Keep votes, and 9 Delete votes
However, this includes 2 votes (the less noticable of which was by Tupsharru) which were "keep or merge" as keep votes, which I feel is quite misleading.
The tally should be either
or
It is also worth pointing out that the delete votes are probably equatable to merge votes in this particular vfd, which would make it 28 merge, 14 keep - a 2:1 ratio. ~~~~ 9 July 2005 14:22 (UTC)
Thanks, it reflects the vote accurately now. ~~~~
Can you count the valid votes at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Gil_Student and take appropiate action, since you are an admin. It has been up for more than 5 days and is attracting too many unregistered voters. --PinchasC 12:55, 10 July 2005 (UTC) Someone else took care of it, thanks anyways. --PinchasC 14:47, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Allen3, with your changes I doubt if this page needs to be in vfd anymore ! Manik Raina 12:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Allen3, I know of a user's IP address which is a chronic vandal and erases pages/writes nonsense or profanities in pages. How does Wikipedia deal with such people ? Do let me know. Manik Raina 10:30, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Don't sweat the toes. (ick, toe sweat...) Everyone has a different view of how to deal with sock puppets. - Tεxτurε 19:15, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You voted to delete Stephan Kinsella. I don't agree with your standards, but applying those standards consistently, wouldn't you also vote against Tom G. Palmer, which is even worse vanity (and mine is now completely objective, not vanity at all). Stephan Kinsella 15:50, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, before you read on I would just like to say that I have so far only posted this to a limited amount of administrators for consultation. If you have any objections to its wider distribution or suitability for Wikipedia please let me know.
Hi, I would just like to invite you to find out about the World Community Grid Human Proteome Folding Project. This is a purely philanthropic project and supported by a "blue chip" corporation in IBM. There is an ability to join a team once you have downloaded the software and another user has already established the Wikipedia team.
I would like to emphasise that I do not want to pressure anybody into feeling obligated and I understand the limited computer resources/access available to some. Feel free to pass this message on and thank you very much for your time, Mark 21:52, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for bailing me out. I was totally confused.--Cberlet 22:33, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
On July 22, you processed a VfD deletion [1]. The article seems to have been re-created today. Could you take a look at it? --RoySmith 17:44, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --RoySmith 18:29, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"I have speedied the recreated article as a substantially identical copy of previously deleted material." - Incorrect - It was entirly different in its structure and its content, therefore I request you look at old and new and consider undeleating it. Kipper2258 20:43, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for restoring the old one for comparison. By the time I saw your message, however, another admin had already re-speedied it, which is just fine by me. --RoySmith 13:05, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Okay - Thanks for looking into it - My only consern with why the page was ever deleated remains the same -The other seperate pages of MOOs are basiclly the same as PythonMOOs was - maybe the mass delete should be considered (Bar LambdaMOO as this does seem worthwhile) - and maybe a section for each of the MOOs listed in Popular MOOs (or were atleast) to provide a reference of the different braches of MOO that exist. Please consider this and have a glance through the approate pages. Kipper2258 11:50, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Allen3, thank you very much! :) Sigh...and I thought the coming of Unicode would be a good thing. ;-) Take care, Func( t, c ) 15:25, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Rktect 15:16, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Allen3, I appreciate your support in my adminship, and I especially appreciate your assistence in dealing with the "Unicode Username Vandal". :) Thank you very much! :)
Please never hesitate to let me know if you have concerns with any administrative action I may make.
Func( t, c, e, ) 19:12, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Allen, you closed a VfD for this article here. User:RubenWiki, who has not made a single other edit to WP, has just placed an article in the namespace. A google search ("Sheepish Productions") returns not a single mention of this supposed company that is not a mirror.
The article is also very deceptive: the author has written "A subsidiary of Sheepish Productions, Sheepish News, has its own regular news bulletin and associated website [1] with up-to-the-minute information on local, national and international events..."
The website that is referred to is a ridiculous geocities page; the only things on it are a bunch of goofy photos. There is no news service at all, much less an "up-to-the-minute" one.
I'd like to know how similar the current page is to the original deleted one. If it's similar, it should be speedied. If it is not, it really should be considered in VfD for WP:N, WP:V, and WP:NOT. Regards—Encephalon | ζ 04:59:08, 2005-08-20 (UTC)
Can you believe these guys? The link's blue again.—Encephalon | ζ 12:09:13, 2005-08-20 (UTC)
You missed one: Production_de_sheep. --GraemeL (talk) 13:22, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A heads up, User:152.163.100.7 talk contribs, has signed your name on [2], and closed the vfd, you might want to check it out. Cursive 01:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, was about to ask. I initially reverted because I didn't realize it really was the VfD, then re-reverted under the assumption it might be you not-logged-in. Please log in and identify to remove doubt, or confirm we're dealing with an imposter. JRM · Talk 01:19, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Though I dislike the project immensly I agree with your closing decision since there there wasn't a consensus to delete, I do however think that the result of the debate wasn't really keep, it was no consensus {keep} since there wasn't really a consensus to keep either. I could be wrong though and I applaud your courage in taking on the closing of such a controversial VFD. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 01:23, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
What is the rule on how often VFDs may be proposed? So far one of the pages I've worked on has been nominated for VFDs twice and survived both and someone is attempting to nominate it for a third VFD in as many months. It survived its last VFD attempt just 22 days ago and now the third VFD attempt appears to be begining. People are nominating the page without checking its history and just use their dislike of the focus of the article as their reason to nominate it. This is the page in question
Alyeska 00:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Another question. Someone removed the content from both the article and the discussion page and redirected them to a bad listing (changed from SD.net to SD.org). While the content has been restored, all the edit histories are gone. The old edit histories show up in the SD.org but not SD.net even with the old content merged. Is there anything that can be done about this? Alyeska 08:38, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Some information has come to light. The user who nominated the SD.net entry for VFD nominated it on his 8th edit. This very same user is banned from SD.net and has a clear conflict of interest in this process. Before attempting to nominate the SD.net entry for VFD he attempted to vandalize it. Furthermore, after nominating SD.net for VFD he edited the VFD to remove his name as being the name of the person who started the VFD and placed a non-existant username instead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Stardestroyer.net2 In my book this is a clear case of a bad faith VFD nomination (especialy when you consider SD.net survived two previous VFDs already, one just 3 weeks prior to the newest VFD) on the part of someone carrying out a personal vendetta. Furthermore this very same user ( User:Tanizaki ) then instated a VFD against the Trek BBS entry on Wikipedia citing false reasoning as the grounds for the VFD. I believe something must be done to stop this nonsense. Alyeska 21:15, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help, Allen 3. I want to submit the article Vishnu sahasranama for featured article status.
Raj2004 19:49, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For your information, I have now submitted a request for arbitration: User:rktect -- Egil 11:34, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for noticing. The text instructions weren't that clear so I ended up on a wrong page apparently. I will repost on the correct page. --None-of-the-Above 12:32, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Still sifting through Category:Pages on votes for deletion I came across Trackster, which was added to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Mytrackster, which you concluded as 'delete'. You may have overlooked it. --Doc (?) 21:28, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Allen3,
Could you tally the vote on the Samuel Krafsur Votes for deletion page? [3]I believe it's been listed the recommended length of time! Thank you much! ClownBoy 16:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
My bot should be in full operation, in respect to adding old days and new days. If, any reason, it does not, please notify me. Also, if you have any suggestions for the format change of how it places the link for the pages automatically, drop a note. Thank you. --AllyUnion (talk) 01:52, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I have copyright permission for my entry on Demarest Hall, I live with Enon Avital, the creator of the webpage with the "possible copyright infringement," it's fine by him that I'm using the information, he lives done the hall from me, email him here: [email protected] Or [email protected] and [email protected] who I both work with as Culture Studies leader of Demarest Hall. I'm Brian Zimmerman by the way, I run Culture Studies at Demarest Hall.
Hi there! How have are you doing? :) I just wanted to invite you to have look at the last work of mine, a massive expansion of Texas Ranger Division, if you have the time. I've just submitted it to Peer Review, and I'd love to have your input as a Texan and a serious critic, not to mention as a friend. *Kisses*! - Shauri Yes babe? 02:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have carefully reviewed your comment here, in which you say that I should accept concensus of others before thinking to be promoted.
While I think I had explained my actions in my reply on that page, I honestly could have made a mistake in judgment in that case. However, I feel that you and other editors are not treating applicants for admin in the same way you treat current admins:
Here, for example, at least seven admins and bureaucrats got into a prolonged edit war, on the Front Page of Wikipeida, not just some obscure FA-page; and, I did not hear any criticism from you or your friends -while minor questionable judgments by me are reason to deny adminship. Why?
I too am a Christian, and I believe in adhering to the highest principals, and that is why my disappoiintment is exaggerated: Further, these double standards happen not just to me but to others, and that is why we must follow Christ's example (John 13:15) and then go above and beyond and do greater works: John 14:12, with reference to your user page.
Those "greater works" surely included you speaking out about "double standards" for "the privileged." So, while I'm not perfect, I do think I'm at least as qualified as the next person User_talk:GordonWatts/RfA to get a few extra tools to help me help my community, since the policy is quite clear that those with my qualifications are permitted these extra tools.
On a side note, while I was very upset at your post, it has caused me to dig deeper for answers, and I am very grateful: Thank you for your comments in this manner.--GordonWatts 21:35, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think I need an extra hand. If you get a chance later in the week, do you think you could help me out with archiving the reference desk subpages? There are some simple guidelines on the talk page. I hope you can help out! --HappyCamper 02:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's very hard to find out how a person is to defend themselves in Wikipedia. This may be the wrong place, and if it is I'm sorry. My name is John D Curnow and I'm not a hoax, as one person suggested. I was one of the first people to record bird songs in the midwest. My tapes were sold by the Audubon Camp here in Wisconsin. The NASCO Corp of Fort Atkins, WI sold my tapes to high schools all over the US and Canada for ten years. A copy of my book "Plavt Communities - Ecological Studies Of The Upper Midwest" was copyrighted and sent to the Library Of Congress. I was also awarded the outstanding alumni award from the University Of Wisconsin-Platteville and I did teach from 1951 - 1999. I may not be important enough to be found in Google and I can accept that, but I'm certainly not a hoax! John D Curnow
Words can't say how grateful I am to you, Allen. Ever since my first day on WP, you've always watched over me. You've supported me all the way, silently, yet always present. You're a hard working, brilliant editor, but that pales in comparison to the beautiful person that you are. I merely wanted to thank you from my heart for once again being there when I needed you, like you've always had. My dearest friend, THANK YOU! I'll always be here if the day when you need me arrives. Hugs, Shauri Yes babe? 23:20, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Heya, you seem to have appeared around the time when I went on my extended wikibreak, but since I'm back I've noticed you do lots of good work. Thanks, and keep it up! --fvw* 00:10, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Was pretty surprised to see you there! Ryan Norton T | @ | C 03:45, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For fixing my redirect snafu on Ahmed Mehalba. Much appreciated. Joaquin Murietta 15:30, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would just like you to know that 32,406 people hate you now. Everyone at TOTSE, minus one traitor.
Have a nice day sir. I hope you're better at software engineering than life.
Hi there, In the FAC list, I see that a number of nominators have said that they received little feedback on peer review, and 'I wish people had told me about x and y there, before it got to FAC nomination' etc.
I wonder whether it would be appropriate to add a note at the top of the PR page encouraging nominators to (nicely) ask a few contributors in the general area of their article in question to provide feedback. Tony 05:02, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed you reverted the blanking exactly the same time as I moved it. What do you think, should this be send to AfD as a non-notable author? It is clearly an autobiography and already userfied to User:ChristianBryant. jni 11:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I noticed that you archived the current peer review of acetic acid. Is this always done after a month, automatically? We are working towards this being an FA article, and although we are getting close, as I understood it the peer review is still going on (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemicals#Acetic_acid_to_FAC.3F for some recent discussion). Once the FA status is achieved (hopefully!) then the peer review will become inactive. I recall that with our last FA article on hydrochloric acid the peer review also lasted about 6 weeks, we fuss over things a lot in chemistry! Should it be "unarchived" until we're finished? Thanks, Walkerma 04:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You executed the delete on the above speedy: there were 2 delete votes, 1 keep vote, and one comment (no vote) observing that the reason for the speedy were probably not valid. That doesn't look like a consensus to me. I put a request to reinstate the article on User talk:Radiant! --- Charles Stewart 14:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I see it is gone again, where is the voting system these days? Is it once an article is deleted, all new ones and reformed useful ones will also be removed.
Merge is now completed, and article is labled for cleanup (probably since I'm nt going to do a good job myself - and I know it). Please feel free to consider addition of a Redirect to PythonMOO directing to MOO#PythonMOO. 172.188.21.72 19:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC) The bold one! (Oh, and the IP shift thing is due to having a very unstable AOL DSL connection, highlighting their rather individual IP assigning system.[reply]
