User talk:Allen3/Archive6

It needs to be deleted, in my opinion. My speedy tag has sat all day. S. Dean Jameson 23:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion has already been performed.[1] --Allen3 ^talk 00:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for expressing your concerns on the recent issue Issue with TinucherianBot in Project Banner Tagging for WP:FOOD . I have made some comments and explainations at Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#TinucherianBot and I am leaving this note just for your information -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 08:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove the theory that Ken Lay is not dead, from his page. This is a serious theory with websites on it researching the story. Max Kesier a well known journalist has reported on the theory. This is not a weasel word theory you idiot. Why do you want to hide this story from even being noted. You call it weasel word theory. This is a story that attracts much attnetion. The 911 page allows conapistaxcy theories what is so special about Ken Lay. It is a serious theory. This is not some pop star this was a suspected multi billion pound fraudster what kind of idiot thinks this is a theory that can just be swept under ther carpet like we should not harm, some hamrless old billionaire frauidster. What is your game. I demand an explanation why do you want to shut up this theory. And do not cvll me a weasel. You are the weaswel for deleting facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wootuber (talk • contribs) 14:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a section stating that "Some claim that Ken Lay is still alive" accompanied by a website promoting the theory does not satisfy Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for inclusion of conspiracy theories. Please see Wikipedia:Fringe theories for information on what is expected for inclusion of this type of information. --Allen3 ^talk 14:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you I have nothing to do with the website. I just heard the theory today. I got the theory of listenting to Max Keiser, a well known journalist who has a show on the BBC. You cannot just claim i must have something to do with the website if I link it. Grow up. I have my own websites and none are linked to wikipedia, or to do with this subject. It does satisfy wikipedia guidelines. It has been reported on by serious journalists. We are not tlaking about some sports reporter or some bloke who won a bike race. This is an important story and a story this big should be noted. I used you so called weasel words, in the sense that i did not say the theory was true. What do you expect me to do to say theory is true. You are offensive in saying i used weasel words I used non conslusive terms. I do not know if the theory is true but it is a serious theory and should be noted, for conjecture. And it should be as it is a serious theory —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wootuber (talk • contribs) 14:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If what you claim is true, then it should be a simple matter for you to WP:CITE your sources. I have been littering my messages and edit summaries with links to the appropriate Wikipedia policies and guidelines that affect your efforts. I strongly recommend you take the time to read some of them. --Allen3 ^talk 14:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Allen3, thought you might want to weigh in at this discussion. Several people think the article title should use an en dash instead of a hyphen. Please let us know your thoughts. Thanks, Darkspots (talk) 18:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great work! Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 00:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words. I will admit I went for what is probably the most interesting of the 25 legislative sessions first. --Allen3 ^talk 00:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for you taking the time to read my request about the speedy deletion of my article on 4Dbling. You are the first one to delete it right away. If you go to his myspace you can see most of the things, as well as magazine articles that attribute to his creditability. His 100,000+ music download sales can be viewed from the soundclick.com records of sales, but this is not accessible to the public anymore because of changes made on the website. He has done work with many artists on wikipedia though, who have made millions of dollars, for which he got a percentage of that revenue. All this data is private though and my sources are from the musicians themselves as well as managers and people who know them personally. His myspace however does show records of his 1,000,000+ music plays/downloads.

RapperMan12 (talk) 16:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 13th Arizona Territorial Legislature, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 23:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my Geek page edit deleted by you ? JohnShocked (talk) 05:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnShocked (talk • contribs) 05:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really believe that the word "geek" is derived from the german, dutch or alsatian origins mentioned in the existing Geek wiki page ? JohnShocked (talk) 12:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George W. P. Hunt, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 02:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone prematurely deleted two days worth of expiring hooks, some were still usable. One was admitted my own, whjich had all its problems fixed. Would you pleasde consider using it, as there is still some too left for the next update.--Bedford ^Pray 12:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lewis Wolfley‎, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wafulz (talk) 13:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked me for mentioning the John Edwards scandal on his talk page. Now it's pretty much the only thing on his talk page. Enjoy your empty victory. 69.204.74.75 (talk) 04:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've put on a /16 rangeblock, so unprotection of Talk:Main Page should be OK. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. The entire comment you removed was lifted verbatim from an Ann Coulter column.[2] Kelly ^hi! 17:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you block him, please Many Thanks! RoyFocker (talk) 15:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!! I am currently active on en.wikipedia.org, en.wiktionary.org, meta.wikimedia.org and I want to delete them all permanently, or I want to delete my accounts on these three projects permanently, but since it is not possible to delete accounts as stated on wikipedia policy I would like to make my space on these three accounts available for other users and have them all renamed for other users and consider them as their property, besides I have no contributions anyway(I deleted them all).Can you advice me or give a step by step process on how to use my right to vanish completely on these three projects of wikimedia(wikipedia.org, wiktionary.org, and meta.wikimedia.org), or anything regarding my case?--Rollyta (talk) 04:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)--Rollyta (talk) 04:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles 1st Arizona Territorial Legislature, and William T. Howell, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Nice job! Daniel Case (talk) 03:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Allen3,

I think the edit (deletion) which you performed on the National Bank of Bahrain article was incorrect. As the page was created just before deletion, and was in the stages of expansion. The article was also tagged as Under construction, Not ready to use. This is no offence, it's just so you know. I doubt you live in Bahrain, but this is just for your knowledge; The NBB is one of the oldest and most recognizable structures in Bahrain. And is one of the tallest buildings in the country... There are a lot more facts, but i dont want to clutter your page :-). I hope you don't mind me re-creating the page, as it is an important article. Dont worry, it wont be a crappy article; trust me, i know how crappy articles are these days... Have a good day.--Rehman (talk) 01:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response here. Dont worry, i'm not the kind that posts crap, consider looking at examples of my articles... Have a good day.--Rehman (talk) 02:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Allen,

Due to the fact that i am not an administrator and you are, i'd like you to take a look at the following four articles and consider deleting them. As those articles aren't link to anywhere that makes sense, they are "orphaned" in other words.

• Dual Tower 1 & Dual Tower 2 (an article already exists on this topic here).
• List of tallest buildings in the Arab League > Totally orphaned
• List of tallest towers in Southwest Asia > Never used, and also orphaned.

Thanks in advance. Have a good day.--Rehman (talk) 08:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please change in this archive (I'm blocked from this operation): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Greek_alphabet/archive_1#A_different_opinion_worth_noting.3F following non-working link: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adamic_language/archive0" into http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Adamic_language that works, because new link is closest equivalent to old link, thanks. Orlowski pokemaster (talk) 10:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete this talk (I'm blocked from this operation): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wikinger It belongs to user that is banned indefinitely, and contains only bot messages, thus is unneeded at all. Orlowski pokemaster (talk) 10:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Wikinger (2nd nomination) regarding the message above Mayalld (talk) 13:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please change in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Googol (I'm blocked from this operation): "10^(10100)" into "${\displaystyle 10^{10^{100}}\,\!}$" to avoid bad rendering of this power tower. Orlowski pokemaster (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aircraft carriers in fiction, and I just want to say kudos for expressing your argument so well. It is the most coherent deletion rationale for this type of articles that I've seen at AfD. Best, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Allen3. I was wondering if you could help me with something. For the past week, I have been reverting changes done by 62.248.33.87 on the Prison Break article. The changes concern the numbers in the table in the "Ratings and critical reception" section. I don't know if he/she understands that the information he/she is using are actually average number of viewers for an individual episode and not for a season, which is what that section is for. I have already left a message on his/her talk page but he/she has reverted my changes again. The numbers I used were verified on the access date with the source I cited. I was wondering if you know how to stop these changes by this user. Regards, Ladida (talk) 10:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ladida (talk) 09:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was just wandering if you could unblock Big Brother 11 (U.S.) so it can be created? The show has been picked up with sources. There is now substantial content for the article and while I am usually against creating articles for reality TV shows six to twelve months away I find it unfair for other confirmed shows like Survivor 18 to have an article while some can't. Plus anon editors may attempt to create the article anyway under a different naming scheme. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:45, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tips about moving articles. A 'move' command sure sounds better than a cut and paste move! Appreciate the pointers. Asbruckman (talk) 01:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I converted this redirect to a disambiguation page. Perhaps you could help expand this since some of the editors were okay with your opinion.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why deleted maziar dehghan page? plz dont delet

tnx

Maziar Dehghan

مازياردهقان —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.191.142.178 (talk) 10:47, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alan, I think I understand why you tagged the entry for swift deletion but I didn't notice any constructive help, a biblical quote is not helpful. I think because I put a redirect to web site at the top of the page - a mistake on my part - but I am not the creator of this site nor am I marketing director etc etc, I wrote some of the content and wanted to put it in Wikipedia because it si genuinely a development and the first in its field.Please look at it again, I have removed the tags and I want to repost the page. Thanks.

--Jd1949 (talk) 12:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on List of Governors of Arizona (Ignore some of the rough edges, it's a work in progress), and was wondering if you still had access to the Goff book you used in some of the governor articles? You added refs to "Goff, John S. (1978). Arizona Territorial Officials Volume II: The Governors 1863-1912. Cave Creek, Arizona: Black Mountain Press." I'd love to be able to see it, but sadly the nearest one to me is somewhere in Wisconsin. Could you take a look at it and verify the dates I have for the territorial governors, if possible? Please let me know. Thanks! --Golbez (talk) 10:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woo, thank you, that does help :) --Golbez (talk) 18:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, I was able to really round out the table and simplify the refs. One question, though, it talks about Frémont taking the oath "c. October 6, 1878"; is there any explanation by Goff why this is unsure? Is there a date range? --Golbez (talk) 07:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THANK you, I had been trying to avoid citing that page (no fault to him, but I'd prefer to cite the works more directly), and that helps a lot. :D --Golbez (talk) 09:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to bother you for another request, but you've been so helpful to me so far, I was wondering, does the book have any detail on John N. Irwin's resignation? I can only find one google cite that mentions when, why, and how, and I was hoping I could replace it with a Goff citation. I know he resigned in April 1892, I know it was because his mother died and he wanted to attend to family business, and I know it might have involved a request from the secretary of state; does the book clear this up, so that I can cite it directly? Thanks so much. When this gets featured, I'm giving you a barnstar or something. :P --Golbez (talk) 20:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say enough how much help you've been. A question on Baylor, though; most sources I see say he made the order on March 20, then when it reached President Davis, he immediately stripped Baylor of his command. However, I found one source, which seems detailed enough, which says that Davis demanded an explanation first, which Baylor supplied in December 1862; and it was only after this explanation that Davis acted. Seems minor, and I'm still not sure if I should even mention it, but I do want to be thorough. Do you know anything about this? (The source is here: [3]) Also, if there's anything else to the article to add, please share. :) --Golbez (talk) 02:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Though I was also concerned about the fact that it mentions a response at all; no other sources do, but this one does include the letter, etc. --Golbez (talk) 15:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello Allen, I want to help me something of a template for user page used inappropriately. --Oracle Database (talk) 16:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? --Allen3 ^talk 17:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed better. Max Sem has also fixed [[WP:AWB]. Rich Farmbrough 11:51 19 October 2008 (UTC).

Thank you very much, you may delete the website.

Thanks for helping out at DYK. However, when there is an inuse tag on the next update page it means someone is still working on the update and it's not ready to be posted.

As it happens, I had pretty much finished that update anyhow so it doesn't matter this time, I'm just pointing it out for future reference. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 11:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please remember to archive the previous update's hooks when you post the new update, because if the person posting the new update doesn't do it, it tends to get overlooked. I've done it now but again, this is just for future reference, thanks. Gatoclass (talk) 12:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frederick A. Tritle, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for you help at DYK! Royalbroil 17:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks a lot for choosing my hook on Sinop Fortress Prison. Cheers. CeeGee (talk) 06:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allen3,

I'm completely new to the Wikipedia page editing/deletion process. I'm interested to know specifically why the "Major Orchestra Librarians' Association" page was deleted? Is there a log/location that shows any discussion(s) that may have led to this deletion?

Thank you,

RAS

216.137.198.203 (talk) 14:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you tagged the talk page of RMHED for blanking articles pages. This is part of a much larger discussion at the noticeboard, where I am finally asking for adminstrative action. Please take a look if you have the time. PHARMBOY ^{(moo) (plop)} 00:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the redirect fromBritish East India Company as you can see here because this page should not redirect. There are two East India Companies and saying that the British one is superior or just the default is incorrect. Feel free to discuss this on my talk page if you have anything else you want to say to me about this issue.

-Thanks Skycaptain95 (talk) 15:39, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article C. Meyer Zulick, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding school districts, keep in mind that school districts are automatically notable as they are local governments as much as towns and cities are. However, the entry that you deleted was no good. I'll just write a new page about it. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that just because an article is created with a specific title that it does not mean that the article is about the subject listed in the title. The deleted article had little to nothing to do with a school district despite the name used during the article's creation. --Allen3 ^talk 00:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

last week i noticed that you warned me about 3rr. there were two of us making equal amounts of reverts. why only warn me? you and bedford seem to make similar edits to the page in question. could it be that you only go after those who disagree with you? i would warn you to try to be more objective. Brendan19 (talk) 18:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take the time to check the facts before making unsupported accusations of misconduct. A simple comparison of the time when I placed the warning on your talk page with the edit history for the Rush Limbaugh article shows that at the time the warning was made, you were the only person bumping up against the 3 revert rule. If you then check my edit history you will see I was not active after placing the warning till the next day. The obvious and correct answer to your question is that I did not issue the warning to Bedford was because at the time I left my computer there was no reason to do so. As to you concerns about coordinated efforts, I would advise you reflect on Wikipedia:Words of wisdom#The paradigm that there's only a cabal if you want there to be one. --Allen3 ^talk 00:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well, lets see.

limbaugh edits...

(cur) (last) 03:45, 7 November 2008 Bedford (Talk | contribs) (68,736 bytes) (Undid revision 250166968 by Brendan19 (talk) I did give a reason; you're out of context besides that) (undo)

(cur) (last) 03:28, 7 November 2008 Brendan19 (Talk | contribs) (69,008 bytes) (→Prescription drug addiction: his own views on the subject are quite relevant and appropriate. i am inserting rush's own opinions- not my own. if you remove this please give a reason) (undo)

(cur) (last) 03:18, 7 November 2008 Bedford (Talk | contribs) (68,736 bytes) (Undid revision 250163996 by Brendan19 (talk) WP:UNDUE) (undo)

(cur) (last) 03:07, 7 November 2008 Brendan19 (Talk | contribs) (69,295 bytes) (Undid revision 250162879 by Bedford (talk) look at the history of this page (specifically march 4th 2007). this was a majority decis) (undo)

(cur) (last) 02:59, 7 November 2008 Bedford (Talk | contribs) (68,736 bytes) (Undid revision 250162648 by Brendan19 (talk)) (undo)

(cur) (last) 02:57, 7 November 2008 Brendan19 (Talk | contribs) (69,295 bytes) (→Prescription drug addiction: there was a big fight over this one a while ago... not sure how it got removed, but it should definitely be there.) (undo)

your edits...

21:25, 8 November 2008 (hist) (diff) Rush Limbaugh ‎ (Revert POV Apples and oranges comparison. Limbaugh has never been tried for, let alone convicted of, drug charges so adding the comparison serves no useful purpose)

21:38, 7 November 2008 (hist) (diff) Sarah Palin ‎ (→Public image: remove clear distortion of cited source. When using a quotation, the full sentence should be considered instead of just the fragment supporting the article editor's viewpoint)

19:18, 7 November 2008 (hist) (diff) Portal talk:United States Army ‎ (→Links in articles: another requested example)

17:24, 7 November 2008 (hist) (diff) Wind & Water Puzzle Battles ‎ (Fix redirect) (top)

17:18, 7 November 2008 (hist) (diff) m Neil Weste ‎ (Reverted edits by 217.37.138.57 (talk) to last version by Studerby) (top)

03:35, 7 November 2008 (hist) (diff) User talk:Brendan19 ‎ ( You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. )

by a "simple comparison of the time" as you suggested, i see that you warned me about being blocked, then you say you didnt see bedford's revert ten minutes later. i am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on that even though i find it hard to believe that you would warn me and then not stick around ten minutes. so by that you would be "obvious and correct" that he had only reverted twice, but unfortunately for you it is easily seen that you were back editing @ 17:18. bedford's three edits were still within 24 hours at that point... all the way till 02:59 the next day. i also noticed that at 21:25 of the next day you made the exact same revert that bedford had been making. how would you explain that? and this time please tone down the condescension.

i would also add that the revert you and bedford attempted is the same one YOU fought for back in march of 2007. because of that i would have expected you to remember that a consensus ruled against the change you wanted. your intentions seem pretty clear.

Brendan19 (talk) 01:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Siberian Tatar language. Since you had some involvement with the Siberian Tatar language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Cunard (talk) 02:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC) Cunard (talk) 02:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know quite what has happened since I went to bed, but I tagged Corey Boudreaux with {{db-move}} so that Corey Bordreaux – and its page history – could be moved to a new (correctly spelt) name. The original author had attempted a copy-and-paste page move (see here), which isn't how it's done. Instead, I find that the original article, Corey Bordreaux, has been deleted by author request.

Could you please undelete Corey Bordreaux, delete Corey Boudreaux, then move the latter to the former? Thanks. -- Skarl 08:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No need, this has since been sorted. Cheers. -- Skarl 09:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the dicdef template from the zirconate page as unfortunately the information contained in the page is incorrect. There is actually no such acid as zirconic acid- references to it are either old (19th century) or describe compounds such as zirconium hydroxide (which also probably does not exist and it appears we have an article for that as well!) Thanks for indirectly bringing this page (and others) to my attention I shall add some chemistry info to it. Happy New Year. --Axiosaurus (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a "heads up" - Didiot was deleted by User:Krimpet hours after you closed the RfD as "keep" (and this was less than two weeks after the first RfD's "keep" close on the same redirect). I didn't think that an admin can trump two consensus closures - and this seems to indicate that the redirect needs to be protected. I'd leave a message on Krimpet's talk page, but it's semiprotected and my work computer rejects cookies... It just seems to be a shame that policy is being ignored here... Thanks for your time and understanding. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked him in the summer. Unfortunately it seems that his behavior has not improved. In fact, at this stage, I think it's safe to say that he fundamentally doesn't understand the original research policy. Could you please way in, I'm tempted to take this to ANI, but I'm not a fan of the drama board. — Realist² 14:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking to report a piece of vanadalism. I know this is not the place to do it, but i am afraid an admin will not get to it for a while. I also do not know the IP address or username of the offender. I just randomly picked you as the admin to fix this.

In the Louis XIV of France article, just below the contents bar, somebody wrote "um all i have to say is POOPY FRENCH DO YOU SERIOUSLY THINK ANYONE LIKES LEARNING ABOUT THE CORBEAU AND RENARD? I THINK NOT ". There is not an edit button at that section for me to delete that.

I am sorry about the awkwardness of this message, since this is the improper way to report something. However, I believe that this if the most efficent manner to get the vandalism corrected as fast as we can.

Lepetitcaporal3 (talk) 23:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allen3. Dear Allen3. Please repost the Kingman Museum Wiki information. The man that posted it had the full permission of Kingman Museum to do so. He is chair of our marketing committee and is not infringing on our copyrighted webpage when he used it for his resource, as I gave him permission. I appreciate your diligence in monitoring usage rights,however, I wished you would have checked with us before deleting. We're trying to establish a web presence...this has set us back a little, since we're referring people to it ad naseum. Thank you. Sara Ann Briggs, CEO Kingman Museum, 175 Limit Street, Battle Creek, MI 49037-2176. [email protected]. Appreciate you taking care of this ASAP.

The museum clearly claims copyright of the text posted to Kingman Museum as demonstrated by the copyright notice at the bottom of the page. Your request in turn comes from an IP address registered to a technical consulting firm with no obvious connection to the museum.[4] If you truly wish the posted text restored then you will need to complete the actions described at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Granting us permission to copy material already online. A link to this page was included in the notification provided to the user who initially posted the article. --Allen3 ^talk 20:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is a GFDL compatible license and why would we need one if we are the creators of the website and Wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.215.251.130 (talk) 19:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GFDL stands for GNU Free Documentation License (full text of license available [Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License|here]). This is the license under which all text on Wikipedia is licensed. A GFDL compatible license is a legal license that provides rights equal to or grater than those granted by the GFDL without adding any restrictions that are barred by the GFDL.

If you are being asked to show your text is available under a GFDL compatible license then it is because you have not established your ownership in a manner that Wikimedia (the parent organization that runs Wikipedia) is able to verify. A verification process is needed due to the large number of false ownership claims Wikipedia receives on a daily basis. For information on how to donate copyrighted material to Wikipedia please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Granting us permission to copy material already online. --Allen3 ^talk 20:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on deleting it. It's been deleted before as it was nominated for AFD by Jamesontai last year. I don't know why User:Razgriz2 told me about the article and he's quite a nuisance because nearly all of his contributions were on my talk page. --Eaglestorm (talk) 04:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, an article that you prodded, How to prevent mold, has gone to AfD here because the user removed the prod without giving a rationale. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 16:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering why my article on J. Waskom Pickett was deleted (23:36, 18 January 2009 Allen3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "J. Waskom Pickett" ‎ (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page) 63.174.94.2 (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I have looked at the page history and see that the article was requested to be deleted by another user, not the author of the page, which is me. It is listed as a copyright violation. If there is similar content on another website, it is likely because I have posted similar information on this subject elsewhere. Just trying to make it available on Wikipedia. Is there any recourse for getting the article reposted?63.174.94.2 (talk) 22:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On January 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edmund W. Wells, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 13:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good Afternoon Good Sir, The military history project includes all Military personnel, including both leaders and common soldiers, as well as other people involved in military affairs and although that military service does not in and of itself place an individual within the scope of the project—particularly in the case of service in modern militaries. To qualify them, an individual's military service must have been somehow noteworthy or have contributed—directly or indirectly—to their notability. The catch here is indirectly, how do you define that? Although I will admit that perhaps on occasion I have been loose with my interpretation of the military notibility of an individual all of the personnel whom I left those portal links on do pertain to the portal I left. Also, it does no harm to the article or the portal by associating them to each other and in fact generates traffic to each by linking them. Similar to adding a category.--Kumioko (talk) 22:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good Morning, First that was not a consensus issue, it was merely a few editors talking about adding portals to articles and no vote was ever taken. Second, I admitted there that at least 1 of the edits among the thousands that I have done was in error due to an error on the page and I fixed it. Third, AWB is not a BOT and is not subject to the BOT criteria, although there are seperate criteria in place to cover AWB. It is a semi automatic (although it can be used as a bot) tool used to make mundane or repetitive tasks without having to individually open every article. I recommend getting familiar with those rules as well. With that said, based on your request though I will concede that perhaps I have been a bit to0 flexible in my criteria for adding portal links so I will stop adding them to United States Marine/Officer, Army soldier/officer and Navy officer/enlisted unless they have some other criteria of notibility that is a more appropriate association to the portal for the purposes of notibility such as the award of a Navay cross or having a ship named for them. Is that reasonable?--Kumioko (talk) 19:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a market researcher who works for a Moroccan American think thank. I created a page about one of the leaders of the Moroccan American community. A published author and community organizer. I made sure I included several referenced including magazine articles and TV interviews. The page was deleted with saying that the person was not relevant. I do understand that wikipedia should be monitored and controlled but what I did not understand how a relevant person to the Moroccan community would be deleted. Thank you for your consideration. Youssef.

Hi there Allen3. You deleted a page I had set up "chocoart". The website/company isn't mine, so I didn't think it would be a problem to set up a wikipage for it. Sorry if this is against wiki rules (was my first page). I was wondering weather such a page would be allowed if it had no links and just contained information like when the company was set up and what they do? Anyway look forward to hearng back from you. Nick. Superlightspeedpanda —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superlightspeedpanda (talk • contribs) 12:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you quick reply Allen3. Sorry for the lots of questions. Would links to aid the verifiability of the article include stuff like UKdata and Gazettes-online, which show record of the company being registered? Then if I rewrote it to include dates of set up, and names registered to etc, with no link to the company etc would that be wiki friendly? Would I be able to put the company logo as a picture? Or is that to much like spam? And is it worth mentioning other similarly named companies such as chocart? -Don't worry I'll make sure I have read everything on the "your first article" page before I do any new posting. Nick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superlightspeedpanda (talk • contribs) 15:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well then which is the correct deletion tag to put on it? Because it quite clearly is nonsense! It's completely fabricated and the only reason it unbelievably survived so long is because it was written at such that some ignorant people might believe it. Or maybe there are just racist editors who like having it. Either way it needs to be deleted so if you are an admin delete it and if not add the correct tag or I will re-add it for someone else to see. Polystyla (talk) 14:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks for the reply, I guarantee this is not fact though. Polystyla (talk) 14:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Allen,
Would you be kind enough to semi-protect this country article? Because it is being pounded with unsourced facts by IP Addresses. I tried doing it myself but realized that only admins can do it. :) Have a nice day. Rehman (talk) 05:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And also, semi-protect and move-protect this country-capital article. Thanks a lot. Rehman (talk) 05:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good nom. Closed early, per WP:SNOW, WP:HOAX. Bearian (talk) 20:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...for fixing my moronity. DMacks (talk) 14:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You just deleted this article, but i thought i'd let you know it's been recreated. I've tagged it as A7. --GedUK  19:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that this article was deleted per A7, not G11. A mistake on my part? decltype (talk) 11:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for a very thorough answer. I sometimes find it difficult to pick the best criteria. Like you said, it is often a matter of opinion. Considering your experience, I have no doubts that A7 was objectively the best fit in this case. decltype (talk) 11:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for message concerning procedure for changing page title + moving page Claude Pouillet. I wasn't aware of it but should have sought for it. Next time better:-) Arjen Dijksman (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the Nixle page. I've added notable news reports that are independent of Nixle and are not a reprinting of press releases, which seemed to be the initial problem you had with the post. I have however, left some of the press releases on the page, as they were deemed notable by Fox, CNN, and other major news outlets.

I hope this will make the Nixle wikipedia page notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Gosser (talk • contribs) 23:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On April 15, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Conscience Fund, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Victuallers (talk) 10:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way that i could have indicated that I thought 'bondservant' deserved its own page, and could have broken the redirect, without 'blanking' the page. I understand the policy, but also think it a somewhat unfair careterization of what I did, since I eliminated no content. Tibetologist (talk) 03:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand your rationale for making this edit. If you know what the deletion procedure is, you should initiate it; you can easily verify that the redirect is to a page that doesn't even mention Grange. If you don't like the essentially blank page (and I don’t like it either), you should replace it with something better, not something worse like a marginally relevant redirect. WP:RFD is 2600 words of bureaucratese that I had never heard of before and really never want to have to read.

I understand you're just trying to make Wikipedia better, as am I (and as I have been since 2001) but I think that in this case you made it worse instead. Maybe you think the same thing about my edit (you did, after all, revert it) but I think that is clearly wrong; a reader landing on a “No information available” page is better than a reader being redirected to a largish page with no relevant content, and the “No information available” page is a lot more likely to get fixed.

Kragen Javier Sitaker (talk) 07:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A while ago (way back in 2005) you nominated Rum for an FA. I've been slowly making my way down the article and beefing it up. Do you still carry enough intrest to help me rework it? ResMar 00:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about improving it for the sake of improving it? This is a long term affair anyway; I don't plan to nominate it for a long, long while...ResMar 19:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think, perhaps, that maybe I can split the lengthy "History" section into "History of Rum?" ResMar 16:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On May 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Oswald Brodie, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 21:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

You are constantly undoing my "neozone" redirect blanking. Why? Please stop it. There is no mention of the word "neozone" in the article, and it falls under an implausible typo category, which is a reason for a speedy deletion.

--Agamemnus (talk) 07:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another note. Speedy deletion criteria 3 for redirects is not for plausible typos as you have said, but implausible typos. --Agamemnus (talk) 16:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Allen3. You have new messages at 91.113.30.1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

decltype (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir Emargie (talk) 14:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hey, i need your help, I don't know if you can resolve this conflict, I put sources and other guy remove my sources 2 times, i don't understand what this guy understand like a source but for me is enough, could you check the sources and tell me if it works for the picture and the comment.

the source is for the picture of Mexican cession in the Mexican american war article.. i found a source to show the mexican view or what is considered like mexican cession in Mexico.. is this one http://www.igeograf.unam.mx/instituto/publicaciones/atlas/divterr18101990.jpg. UNAM National Institute of Geography and History (MEXICO)(Spanish) line 2 picture 3, i think is enough but this guy erase the source,

the other one is for the text to Mexico never recognize the independence of Texas and i use this source where clearly says that, is a documentary to talks about the mexican american war. PBS US MEXICAN WAR paragraph 3, line 2 http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_boundary_disputes.html

thanks for your help.

jmko22 (talk) 09:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which change you are referring to? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American has more than one meaning. While all US citizens are definitely American, not all Americans are from the US. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My version is not ambiguous, and "United States" means the same thing in US English that it does in other dialects. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 15:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with both of those assertions. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 15:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you contending that United States armed forces is an unacceptable use of "United States"? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 16:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't answered my question. My answer to yours is no, but that that's irrelevant. If using US English introduces ambiguity then it becomes a lot harder to defend. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 17:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The address to Seth_C._N._Vidyalya, as well as telephone numbers, are mentioned in the first paragraph. Shouldn't they be deleted from the page and the history as well? -WarthogDemon 19:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added some more content to the article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Allen,

Can you please tell me why our page is being deleted. There is no promotional info on it.

Please give us some examples and feedback.

Sgrealty (talk) 22:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On June 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sharlot Hall‎, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Mifter (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WHY DID YOU DELETE THE ARTICLE "HOT 100 NUMBER-ONE HITS OF 2009"???? I NEEDED TO KNOW THAT INFORMATION —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.136.114.110 (talk • contribs) 20:59, June 14, 2009 (UTC)

Why do you believe I, or any other administrator, has deleted this article? I have performed a case insensitive search of files I have deleted and have found no entries containing the string "HOT 100" any any of the logs for this year or 2008. The article with the closest name to the one you are asking about that I have found is Hot 100 number-one hits of 2009 (U.S.), but it has never been deleted. --Allen3 ^talk 20:20, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion policy is too complicated, if you put delete template it suggegest speedy delete as it should make it normal delete candidate. So I just decided to blank it. Why is wikipedia instructions made so complicated....very hard to find the right way to work or find the right way to proceed in many cases..for new user these long instructions must be really hard... --Typ932 ^T·C 17:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

so why did u delete my page? u know u could tell me first instead of just scrapping the whole page!

On June 25, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sam Steiger, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you deleted Digicrime, but I did not get a template or anything on my page saying that it was deleted. For the future, it would be best to notify users if their article is deleted. --How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 01:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May want to delete and protect Adam Knowles as well as that's been created far too many times since 2006 to not warrant it. The related account and a sock have been listed at AIV. treelo _radda 16:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for catching the error. Crum375 (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I was not aware page blanking was wrong. The only reason I did that was because I am I am about to finish a page for it, which I am to post in some time. Suede67 (talk) 16:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-inserted some material and citations as a "Political incorrectness of the Show" section. I think this makes the article more balanced. Everything else is factual or supportive of the show. Bearian (talk) 20:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Allen3,

Please forgive my intrusion here. Regarding your apparent removal of Ms. Pauker's acknowledgement from the July 24 page, please take a moment to review cosmicbaseball.com. I am certain that your visit will confirm that this long-standing endeavor is remarkably consistent with the intent and practice to provide valuable and valid internet content. In fact, this site predates all but a very few select internet sites, and represents the very concepts that drive the internet. Far more than mere entertainment, the site promotes the values of egalitarian information access, with only one purpose: To engage the human spirit in the journey to what is possible.

Here is what the New York Times thought: In Cosmic Baseball, the Subway Can Swing a Bat.

This avuncular periodical is joined by others.

In fact, precedent exists for wikipedia's recognition of the entity and its representatives.

Wikipedia is, and is not, many things. I understand the various constraints endured by wikipedia in its continual search for, above all, consensus in a world of near-utter confusion. With this in mind, cosmicbaseball.com is an association which wikipedia should be proud to herald. I humbly request that you revisit your decision to decide before a considered consensus can be reached. Please restore the recognition of Ms. Pauker's ongoing contribution to cosmicbaseball.com, a site that happens to predate even Mr. Brand's visionary Whole Earth offshoot, the Well.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Many cheers,

Jed Pauker Jetpower (talk) 07:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: You are recreating a page that was previously deleted.

You should consider whether it is appropriate to continue editing this page. The deletion and move log for this page are provided here for convenience:

   * 21:27, 26 July 2009 Allen3 (talk | contribs) deleted "Gunnison Massacre Site" ‎ (A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content)

---

I was just starting to work on the site and you deleted it. Another page on Wiki already linked to the photo. So, how do I go about adding to a page which was already started, if you are going to delete it before I have finished?

Phil Konstantin (talk) 12:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Phil Konstantin[reply]

You have failed to explain why this article needed a "SPEEDY" deletion.

Yes, I was uploading a large series of photos. When I came across the Gunnison Massacre Site page (which someone else had started) I noticed that it was completely empty other than a title. I added one of the photos which I took when I was there. At that point I decided to flesh out the page. Since I did not have my research documents with me, I continued on with my task of uploading my other photo files.

I have done research into the Gunnison incident. I visited the location because of that research. It is included in one of my books on American Indian history. Gee, I am sorry I did not get back to it soon enough for you. The page existed before I got there, but obviously I am not quick enough for you.

This is one of the things I dislike about Wikipedia. Perhaps your intentions were good, but "Speedy" deletion seems like overkill. It has been very frustrating dealing with people who ask no questions before they delete other people's work.

I do ask questions. My question to you is why did you feel that a "Speedy" deletion was needed for a blank page which had existed for some time before I added something to it? Why didn't you delete it before I added something to it?

Phil Konstantin (talk) 14:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Phil Konstantin[reply]

I first noticed the Gunnison Massacre Site page when I saw a link to it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Millard_County,_Utah

The last time they updated anything appears to have been many months ago. Then again, I am not a Wiki expert, so who knows when they did something last. Perhaps you should visit their website and delete all of the links they have to Wikipedia pages which have nothing on them, either.

Phil Konstantin (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Phil Konstantin[reply]

This applies to both Gogo Dodo & Allen3:

I found both of these sites while perusing a series of pages listed on this main page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Utah

They have a list of sites with a page for each county. Many of the locations have a link to a page with no content.

I did not count them all, but I would guess this group of article has links to several dozens of similar pages with just a title and no content. Both of the pages your two did SPEEDY deletions on, I found through this group of pages. If the rules say these pages should be deleted, then so be it. However, why is it that only the two pages I added photos to (and intended to return to shortly and start some content) have been deleted? If this is so important to you, why haven't someone gone through this to delete the rest of the other pages with no content?

Neither of you have explained this. You have provided adequate documentation allowing you to delete them, but no real comment as to why only the pages I started added content to were cut out. Is this something against me; something you automatic sensor only finds when someone adds something; or some other reason?

I am not complaining. I am just curious.

Phil Konstantin (talk) 23:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Phil Konstantin[reply]

I went back to just the Millard County page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Millard_County,_Utah) I mentioned above and found the following pages which contain only a title and no information. This was only on the Millard County page. The other county pages also had many pages with just a title. It was on two of these pages that I added a photo and intended to come back as soon as I could to add some details. It is obvious to me someone has plans to eventually add material to these pages. But for now, they are just pages with only a title:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Archeological_Site_No._42Md300 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Central_Utah_Relocation_Center_%28Topaz%29_Site http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cottonwood_Wash_%2842_MD_183%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deseret_%2842_MD_55%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deseret_Relief_Society_Hall http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desert_Experimental_Range_Station_Historic_District http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Hotel_%28Kanosh,_Utah%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gunnison_Massacre_Site http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hinckley_High_School_Gymnasium http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_and_Jessie_Huntsman_House http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kanosh_Tithing_Office http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meadow_Tithing_Granary http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Millard_Academy http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Millard_High_School_Gymnasium http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mountain_Home_Wash http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_and_Elizabeth_Partridge_House http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pharo_Village http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Quarnberg_House http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Merien_and_Rosabelle_Robins_House http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scipio_Town_Hall http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Site_42_MD_284 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thuesen-Petersen_House http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Van%27s_Hall

Phil Konstantin (talk) 12:36, 28 July 2009 (UTC) Phil[reply]

Hi, you moved this hook to the DYK queues, but the discussion about the hook is still at T:TDYK. Is it okay to just delete the discussion now? GaryColemanFan (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many hits does a redirect need to be "plausible"? "Barry Dunham" gets almost 72,000. Kauffner (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't handle that appropriately. I will try to go through channels to get the page deleted. I believe it is a self-promotional page created by people who inappropriately used Emma Tringali's music against her wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinkwig (talk • contribs) 01:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allen3, have you seen this article? Good grief, it should go to AfD. What do you think? Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 01:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be entirely appropriate to delete this. Thanks, Hamster Sandwich. Tinkwig (talk) 11:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Debate is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Meet_Me_By_The_Tree_Pits Hamster Sandwich (talk) 17:24, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your concern at DYK. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Allen3. When you are updating the Did you know Queues, please remember to ensure the image will be protected. The last update you did had File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-R17811, Linienschiff "Bayern".jpg unprotected, which could've resulted in vandalism on the Main Page. Cascading protection is of course applied, but only works if the file has been uploaded locally from Commons. Thanks \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 02:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, scratch that, I see you tried to upload it as File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-R17811,_Linienschiff_'Bayern'.jpg. Sorry about the misunderstanding. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 02:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frances Munds, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 14:14, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the beneficial reordering, but can I suggest that you use the actual picture of the Manor (available through its page) rather than the picture of the giraffe at the front door, as I think it's more illustrative of the subject matter of the hook? pushthebutton | go on... | push it! 17:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair enough. Will leave it as it is, then! pushthebutton | go on... | push it! 18:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although, do you think that using a more giraffe-specific collective noun (either "tower" or "journey") would be better than "herd"? pushthebutton | go on... | push it! 21:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]