User talk:Allen3/Archive3

After the recent peer review in which you participated, I was wondering if you might look over the article and consider whether it is worthy of being improved to A-class. I really believe that your comments in the peer review have brought it to this quality level. If you believe so also, please change the talk page template to indicate as such. Thanks so much. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 08:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Allen. Dr Pepper Ballpark has gone up for featured article status. Considering that you contributed to the peer review and are therefore familiar with the article, I was hoping that you might come by and drop your comments at the FAC here. Thanks so much for your input. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 22:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you recently added this article to Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs, and based upon User:Rich Farmbrough\Invalid ISBNs the ISBN that is apparently at issue is the one for the Watkins book. While I do not know what methodology you used to determine that the ISBN was incorrect, I am able to state that the number in the article matches the numbers listed for the book in the Library of Congress catalog and the Amazon listing for the book. The formatting of the number also matches the formatting used on the back cover of my local library's copy of the book. As a result of this information verifying the book's ISBN, I have reverted your addition of the article to this category. --Allen3 ^talk 15:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article said ISBN 0-668-09051-6 it is actually 0-688-09051-6, a subtle difference (I have corrected the article). The check (for most ISBNs I have labelled - some have digits missing) is by comparing the check digit (the last) whith what it would be assuming the rest of the number is correct. I don't label an incorrect hyphenation, I fix that. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 15:41 25 August 2006 (GMT).

That's what I get for reducing my caffeine consumption. Thanks --Allen3 ^talk 15:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for making the effort to provide comments and feedback on the US housing bubble article. As summarized at the page Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Response_to_objections_raised_above, I believe that all the objections and issues raised have been addressed. Would you please have a look and consider supporting this for "featured article" status? Especially given the (unfortunate) recent news (see, e.g., today's New York Times "most-emailed" Op-Ed "Housing Gets Ugly" here), this would be an especially timely featured article, and help "Wiki" live up to its speedy name. Frothy 02:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you contributed a passage on this topic at History of science#Islamic philosophy please comment on the discussion at Talk:History of scientific method#Peer review in medieval Islam?. --SteveMcCluskey 19:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please block User:Malfunction. This is vandalise arcicle Limp Bizkit. All user reverted edition User:Malfunkcion. Please this user block for 10x 3RR. LUCPOL 16:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a review of the article history showed that an edit war involving multiple user accounts and anonymous editors over the order of the two terms used to describe the genre has been brewing for a couple of days, I have instead protected the page. --Allen3 ^talk 01:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you do the same for the Fred Durst article? User:83.18.242.234 is the main user responsible on both articles. He's been attacking this little detail for weeks, and a small handful of us have repeatedly been forced to revert his edits. He's been known to make it seem like other users are vandalizing when in reality they're changing back his edits. Thank you in advance. - Stick Fig 04:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fred Durst article does not show a clear edit war. Limp Bizkit's edit history showed clear evidence of multiple individuals involved on each side of the dispute. This was compounded by what appeared to be sockpuppets and anonymous IPs being used by involved parties to get around WP:3RR limitations. --Allen3 ^talk 10:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning. Please revert (Limp Bizkit is rapcore/nu metal, is not nu metal/rapcore) and protected. Your protected warning arcicle. LUCPOL 10:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see m:The Wrong Version for a fuller explanation of this issue. --Allen3 ^talk 10:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've been working on my user page, and were wondering if there is a template existing to show a specific user's number of edits (namely, my own). Thanks, aido2002 04:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean a userbox, but something like {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}, like it is used on the Main Page to say we are currenly working on.aido2002 10:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you're going to dab Brandy, please use Brandy (entertainer) instead of the redirection Brandy Norwood. Thanks! -- JHunterJ 18:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for changing Flow-based programming to oldpeerreview! However, I just had a couple of ideas for clarifications - can these still be added? Probably dumb question! Jpaulm 14:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Jpaulm 14:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please stop deleting the edit i made, it is a relevant peice of information showing how wide spread Altons fame is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omallystwin (talk • contribs)

Let's discuss at Talk:Alton Brown. Travisl 14:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STOP DELETING THE POST —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omallystwin (talk • contribs) 20:59, October 24, 2006 (UTC)

i am not putting a disruptive edit up. just leave the post aalone and give me a few days to put up the needied citaions.

this is a valid point, so please stop deleting the comment.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Omallystwin (talk • contribs) 15:32, October 25, 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Omallystwin. I've signed as a second certification. Travisl 06:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! I've created Wikipedia:Administrator Review as a process proposal, and I would like your thoughts on the subject. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 06:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting the protect on Get This - most appreciated --Mikecraig 03:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some references into wikipedia itself now. It is hard to find articles on it on google, because it just goes on about the honeybee dance! I've removed the deletion tag, look into gustave flaubert, 'the dance of the wasp' rather than 'the dance of the bee', the Ghawazee, and Kuchuk Hanam, and you should find something somewhere!

Colum

Hi I was trying to give this stub a more NPOV and cite at least a couple of references, could you give it a quick check and see if it's looking better? Thank you.- Ziggrrauglurr 23:45, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aww great i spotted the article first :P. im just a newbie and i was trying to delete the article and file a minor warning to the user.

how do you delete articles, provide a reason for it and warn users? like whats a systematic way of doing so? and can you provide me with the necessary coding? cheers if you do mate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12:19, October 17, 2006 (UTC) (talk • contribs) Tony4moroney

You response to the peta pov tag mirror my sentiments exactly. It is getting very tiresome having to go over it again and again every time someone can't be bothered to read the talk page.-Localzuk^(talk) 12:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am refering to the addition I made to "the Game". The game is a phenom.... in.. a.., somthing like that, its spred by word of mouth. I for one play the Game. I am also a citizen and a resident of Canada. (Just in case you don't know where that is...... it is in North America, just north of that country that I shall not name.)

Thanks for including the Ocular ischemic syndrome in DYK on Oct 27. However, the notification for the same was not put on my talk page. Is that a norm, or is it out of the ordinary? EyeMD ^T|C 12:06, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS

Thanks for the explanation. When I get a chance I'll try to find the necessary verification.Johnson Fan 16:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't I get the DYK talk tag? Most of use do hope for some (however meaningless) acknowledgment of our contributions to the collective. --Bobak 19:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I want to apologize because I think I was unintentionally terse in my above statement. Thank you for taking the time to reply and I appreciate it. All the best, Bobak 00:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I see that it was you who put my nomination of Battle of Vyazma on DYK. I don't see why the author, User:Kenmore, was not informed about that. I nominated the article specifically to show the new editor that his work is appreciated. I believe he does not even know that his hard work reached Main Page. It is not good. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 09:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!! Dismas|^(talk) 22:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! Another one for the memoirs!  :) - Lucky 6.9 01:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your edits at keeping peer review flowing by archiving and removing old nominations, and after checking out your other wikipedian duties I think you truly deserve this:

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For keeping wikipedia organized and flowing you truly deserve the Working Man's Barnstar. - Tutmosis 16:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image no longer on the Main Page; maybe it's time to unprotect it? Beit Or 14:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you advocated and participated in the deletion of this article in August 2005? Don't you think the author of it made a good point when he pointed out that other such lists exist (such as the list of all gay movies)? Wikipedia would be great for this kind of list! Isn't it the kind of thing that the project is all about?

I did not advocate or participate. Instead, I was the closing admin of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DVDs with audio description and simply acted upon the consensus that had already formed. --Allen3 ^talk 10:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Allen. I just noticed that you had left a message on a users talk page warning them again about 3RR just before I did. I didn't notice yours until after I had saved, though I was actually informing them that I had reported them for 3RR last night. (I was checking the status of the 3RR action page and only this morning noticed the part that said it was considered good form to leave a note on the offenders user talk page informing them of the report, so I did so). Didn't want it to appear that I was piling on after you left your message. Anyway, my main question I was hoping you could answer is regarding the 3RR violation notice I left. It has not been acted upon, and I don't know if I made a mistake entering the violation report, or if this sort of thing is just slow to be acted upon in general. It is the first one I have made, so its quite possible I did it incorrectly. Can you take a quick looksee? Here is a Link to the entry itself (in edit mode). [1] Caper13 16:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries about not doing the block yourself. I saw you had a history with the user and didnt ask you act on the request for just that reason. I might like to be an Admin myself one day and understand the care a good Admin has to take when dealing with issues or people they have some connection to. Since I havent done it before and there seems to be a specific format, I just wanted a verification that I didnt enter the request incorrectly :) Thanks for checking! Caper13 18:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Allen3! Thanks for posting the article I wrote as a DYK! Bezapt 21:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the clothing/cigar information once again, citing my reasons on the Talk Page. I have read your comments, and offered my own argument on that page. Eleemosynary 03:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Allen, thanks for tweaking the wordings of nom-Ratnakar Matkari and posting Ratnakar Matkari as DYK. --NRS | ^T/_M\^B 04:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That a statement is unsourced is one thing. That it is "obviously false" is another. Many Canadians have already lost the game, thus you cannot state with any authority that it was false. The only data you have is that it was unsourced. I regret that I have now lost the game. But then, so have you. Fiddle Faddle 11:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the addition of Canada was made to a sentence that explicitly stated its source as an article in De Morgen, and the article in question does not mention Canada, the addition was clearly false. --Allen3 ^talk 11:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your reply here and in more detail on my talk page. I stand by my statement that all you can say is that it was unsourced. Whether I assert that there are Canadians playing The Game in Canada or not is rightly irrelevant to the article, since it is not sourced. I simply mentioned it to show you that your edit summary was unduly harsh. Edit summaries should really be as factual as article edits. Truth is not always verifiable. I think you are protecting the article correctly, but I simply wish you had been more gentle with your edit summary. I htink all one can say at best is that it was a naive edit that you reverted. I haven't checked contributions, but I suspect it was from a newbie, and we are not meant to bite those. Fiddle Faddle 14:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of barse. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 193.1.172.163 23:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Have submitted a request for undeletion of "barse" (as in the bit between your balls and your arse). I and many people I have met use it frequently, as it is now a well known slang term in the British Isles that should be included in any encyclopedia including references to modern culture. You did not delete my article, but a previous one of the same name. (of 6 that have now been deleted).[reply]

I'm not trying to add nonsense to the Verizon article. I was only trying to add a footnote and reference. I'm new to Wikipedia, so I may not know everything yet, but I'm trying to learn.

Preston47 17:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhhh. I see. Well, then, thanks for letting me know. I seriously didn't know that was a satirical news webpage. Now I see the error of my ways.

Preston47 20:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I know that this article's text is corresponding to the official site's text, because this is the official biography. The leader of the band sent to me when i made a fansite for Iconcrash.

Ivettb 22:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Allen, just a quick question. You were reverting the addition of the comparison of drug punishments thing, into the Limbaugh article as a violation of WP:BLP. Two editors are wheel warring the edit back in. Do you still believe that the addition of the quote in that context violates BLP by comparing his outcome to those of people who were found to have committed crimes? Caper13 05:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey allen, welcome to wikipedia yourself. it bothered you that i lumped limbaugh in with other drug offenders. do you believe his plea deal to be something other than one concerning a drug-related offense? or, more pointedly, do you really think he was not a drug offender? (was he using those drugs legally?) cmon. he broke the law or he wouldnt have agreed to a plea deal. thanks Brendan19 06:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I believe Water Fuel Cell violates WP:CITE, WP:V, WP:OR etc... After more than three time that the request for sources has been placed and removed(over a period of several weeks), I am RfCing (Jan 9th 2007). A poll is being held on the talk page. --CyclePat 03:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to get Albert Fish listed at Peer Review. I have added the template but cant seem to add a header to start the process to the peer review page. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 17:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you salting a page using the {{deletedpage}} template. I'm sending this message to inform you that a new method of salting is being trialled at Wikipedia:Protected titles/January 2007/List; administrators can cause pages to be salted without creating them (and hence confusing Special:Shortpages and Special:Randompage) by adding pages to that list. Thanks! --ais523 17:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Of course, it's probably Wikipedia:Protected titles/February 2007/List that should be added to now, but that's empty as of the time of writing, so the January page will indicate the format. --ais523 17:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

excse me but my dad owns the pub i know a lot about it so dont delete it MATE...amit268 thats fair enough, i was just checkin g out the tools at the top, can you at least allow me to write it, then review it for bias etc

I just edited H2o. It has listed the ${\displaystyle C_{v}}$ of gasseous water as being greater than its ${\displaystyle C_{p}}$. When I previewed it, the formatting was all messed up. Is there a trick to editing pages like this??? I documented the changes I thought should be made in the discussion area.

--Commdweeb 00:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I changed out my browser from the standard mozilla that comes with debian 3.x and loaded seamonkey 1.1. I also may not have closed my reference tags properly as you suggest. Either way, it worked and the page is fixed. Thanks for the help.

--Commdweeb 17:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested in splitting up the article List of Olympic medalists in cross-country skiing by gender? The file size is 40 kB. Please advise. Chris 15:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent messages to them as shown in the history, but no one has responded yet. Chris 16:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you are a jerk! you deleted my page just cause you were bored. please put it back.

you deleted my page just for fun! please put it back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.49.119.200 (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I have deleted a fairly large number of articles for a variety of reasons, but fun has never been the reason for any of the deletions. It is also not practicable to determine for which article your are claiming ownership, could you identify which article to which you are referring? --Allen3 ^talk 22:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm not sure what's causing this. The most likely possibility is that the porblems were caused by my internet connection dropping before the bot could fiinish an earlier run, so making it go back to the starting point and re add the reviews. This sort of thinmg shouldn't happen if future, as the bot is now on the toolserver. Please let me know if problems continue! Martinp23 09:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct about the speedy deletion; it was intended to move the userspace over (I did it there as I wanted to be able to save the partially-completed article without it sitting on the article itself). I did not cut and paste it over because someone else within WP:WPTC told me that even from userspace, cutting and pasting should never be done. Since I could not come in contact with any admin at that moment, I went the speedy delete route. CrazyC83 11:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am trying to edit Immingham. I need to change the location of its Fire Brigade service to Humberside Fire and Rescue Service but I can't find that line in the edit box. Do you know how I can change this? TomGreen 14:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks TomGreen 14:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

your stupid, i was trying to write an article, dont delete it. im a christian too

yo Ziz0123, i think you mean you're. as in "you're welcome" Brendan19 07:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the JL Mann HS article and I figured the bio should be a new article. I've just contacted the autor, (we work in the same school district) for copyright permission. I'm planning on asking him for a short explanation on why JL Mann is remarkable enough to deserve a bio article. Thanks for all you do, I'll be happy to go on learning how to be a better wikipedian!--Gacelo 23:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened here? Butterfingers? Browser bug? Femto 16:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Red wings (Sexual Act). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Y|yukichigai (_ramble argue ^check) 22:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your archiving work on Peer Review. Next time you go through could you please archive the peer review for List of Pennsylvania state parks, as it has been in WP:FLC for about 6 days already? Thanks, Ruhrfisch 00:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm User:Akanemoto, I wants restorations in my user page, that have deleted some user pages in the history. Can you doing the restorations of that? I want restorations of all deleted page, including all history of the pages. --Akanemoto 01:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As we've now moved on to FAC, please could you close / archive the peer review page, so we keep discussion in one place. I'd be grateful. --Dweller 10:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. --Dweller 11:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]