User talk:LibStar/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions with User:LibStar. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

	Happy New Year!
	Hello LibStar: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, BusterD (talk) 06:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Hello, LibStar. You have new messages at DUCKISJAMMMY's talk page.
Message added 13:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 13:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I've opened a discussion at talkpage suggesting the above move. I believe it is not controversial so I haven't used the formal 'plate. If you have an opinion either way you're welcome to provide it.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Move complete. As nominator could you remove the AfD 'plate and add an old AfD 'plate to the talkpage?shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 02:57, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I had forgotten about that - probably meant to expand the article, then forgot. I imagine there is a fair amount of dull but notable interaction between the two countries, both ex-Soviet, now EU. Were you thinking of doing anything to it? If not, I will expand it a bit. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I hope you don't get mad at me, but I removed another PROD of yours just now. The article claims the fest has been reviewed by the New York Times and Time magazine. Assuming that is true, there should be paper or online good sources to prove notability. Can I have another week to fix this? Bearian (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Belize–Russia relations may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{{db-g4|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belize–Russia relations}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kastellorizo Airport may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• The airport is linked to the city by a single bus (only during the summer period. Taxis are also available.<ref>[http://www.hcaa.gr/content/index.asp?

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

March in March referenced to opinion pieces and not notable outside blog sphere — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.196.133.151 (talk) 09:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

[1] Your argument seems to say keep. Enigma^msg 18:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

thanks for the pick up, I definitely meant keep. LibStar (talk) 02:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello LibStar. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of British Touring Shakespeare Company, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Reference tool for Google books

I use this tool often as it simplifies adding book sources immensely! You can go to Google books and search for your subject and as you find the references that directly support the claims, just copy the url address and pop it into the link's box and hit enter and it creates the entire mark-up needed. Just copy the mark up and add it directly behind the claim. Simple as that. For other book sources found in real life, news sources, we sources etc., you can use the "prove it" tool in the editing window in the Wiki tool kit or the "cite" feature located next to the "Help" link. Happy editing.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:25, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Barbados–Canada relations may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *{{flagicon|Barbados}}[High Commission of Barbados in Ottawa

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:27, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Could you please take a look again at the AfD? Thank you. Dmatteng (talk) 13:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello LibStar. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Madagascar–Pakistan relations, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Subject of the article is not a person, animal, organization, company, club, website, or event. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

"strong do NOT delete People fought and died for the vote, for freedom and democracy. Therefore all elections have established notability. Besides if you search wiki, a number of UK local elections are covered. Therefore people do find local elections notable"

I am beyond comprehension of the kind of argument being made here. Sport and politics (talk) 22:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Now that the sock puppet, who obviously stole the identity of the person of the same name, is blocked, we can talk about potentially improving the article. I know that the references are not the best, but I found and wrote about the company when I was doing updates on Singapore e-commerce as few months ago. I found references that are currently there, and I saw that company announced plans for expansion that would make it even more present in media. I thought that there will be space to improve the article as the time passes, with currently established marginal notability. What are your thoughts? Thank you. --BiH (talk) 12:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

On Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bangladesh International Recovery Developments? I am not getting why IPs are posting. OccultZone (Talk) 17:32, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi LibStar,

I've nominated some articles for deletion.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014–15 Turkish Basketball League Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013–14 Turkish Basketball League

This is the fist time I've done this. Can you other any guidance? Alans1977 (talk) 13:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Libstar. Your nagging and taunting at BabbaQ's page isn't very nice. Please don't post there again. Bishonen | talk 23:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC).

perhaps you'll note that he followed me around recently to someone else's talk page to conveniently take the side of someone I had a disagreement with. the finland question is important in terms of recent behaviour directed at me. more on that soon... LibStar (talk) 01:03, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

seems like BabbaQ on one hand doesn't want interaction with mw, yet continually replies. I don't understand this contradiction. LibStar (talk) 13:51, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

So an admin can block someone simply because they think posting on their talk page is annoying, or the fact another editor responds around 8 times during the same discussion and that's ok, and warrants no mention... LibStar (talk) 01:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I believe that you have an interest in this topic. Pburka (talk) 19:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

thanks. LibStar (talk) 23:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Universiti Malaysia Sabah may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * Faculty of Computing and Informatics] (formerly known as Labuan School of Science Informatics)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Universiti Malaysia Sabah may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * Faculty of Computing and Informatics] (formerly known as Labuan School of Science Informatics)
• *Centre for Science and Technology] ==

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jean-Serge Brisson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Serge Brisson (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. 117Avenue (talk) 04:34, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

You know this was redirected not merged right? Closer doesn't seem to have found anything worth merging either, so closed as delete (effectively) with a redirect per WP:CHEAP. He didn't get a chance to respond on his talk page but I imagine that'd be what he'd tell you. St★lwart¹¹¹ 07:25, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

you are correct. I will withdraw DRV. Thanks LibStar (talk) 07:54, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

. All good. St★lwart¹¹¹ 08:44, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm reading the other arguments, but why are you telling the others how I vote? I thought I could vote as I want. J 1982 (talk) 12:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @J 1982: You can vote as you want, but the fact is that you are copy and pasting Keep as above to all relisted AfD's. This is a bit disruptive (I don't know if that's the right word.) because usually most admins when closing don't see this message. Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 02:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I know you love awesome AFD arguments so had to draw your attention to this edit which includes the line:

I would suggest there is also a kind of notability sometimes created by a lack of publicity...

Yeah? A lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources might indicate the subject is notable. St★lwart¹¹¹ 22:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

that is a classic! LibStar (talk) 23:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{unreferencedsect{{

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:18, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, we didn't have to wait long for another zinger...

These may not be reliable sources, but they support notability...

Well sure if you consider... Wait. What? No seriously. What? St★lwart¹¹¹ 11:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

excellent! Unreliable sources should now be accepted. LibStar (talk) 13:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Greetings! I'll continue to keep an eye on the Bar article, since it appears that there are several editors with personal agendas. It's ironic, but I also oversee the Bar, Montenegro article as well. One comment though, I see you deleted the entire Culture section. You might consider simply editing it to remove the peacock terms, rather than deleting the entire section. There were some kernels of good info in there, regarding their festivals, and city articles do encourage "Culture" or "Arts and culture" sections. Just a thought.Onel5969 (talk) 13:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Italy–Mexico relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zetas. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Exactly what is it you want more citations for, over at Burkina Faso–Sweden relations? Just bluntly putting "add more sources" doesn't help. Stamboliyski (talk) 17:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Burkina Faso–Sweden relations may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• to Burkina Faso, then known as the [[Republic of Upper Volta]], in 1969. The ambassador was inCn}}itially stationed in [[Lagos]], [[Nigeria]]. {{Cn}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Aquintero82 (talk) 14:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

You claim there is a 'consensus' on how an article should be written, yet, you do not provide any proof regarding this 'way of writing'. I've recently searched through several articles of foreign relations of the United States, Russia, France and China (just to name a few and because they have the most articles relating to the subject) and these article, according to you, do not follow under the 'agreed consensus.' Looking through your contributions, you seem to have a big interest in foreign relations of Mexico articles. You repeatedly come in, re-arange articles the way you see fit, yet you do not create articles nor contribute to them. Either provide tangible proof that indeed there was a 'consensus' stating how articles are to be written, and if so, be so kind as to update every article relating to the subject in Wikipedia or please refrain changing articles to the way you see fit, especially ones that I've created and have been updating and maintaining (which are most of the article relating to Mexico's foreign policy.) Regards, Aquintero82, (talk) 10:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I have edited 100s of bilateral articles, the established long term consensus is to have diplomatic missions in the intro. You seem to want to introduce different style that you prefer to the Mexico series which is inconsistent. You have no consensus to introduce a different style and should seek it at Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force before reverting again LibStar (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

As mentioned previously, show me where I may see the consensus. Usually its saved on a talk page for reference. Also, as I also mentioned, there 100s of articles that according to you, do not follow 'your standard'. I'm quite perplexed! Aquintero82, (talk), 15:34, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

You say that I'm making changes "just to make changes". I can say the same about you. You do not add or contribute in any way to the articles, you simply make changes to things that you do not like. How are you improving it? See consensus yourself or let us go to arbitration. Aquintero82, (talk), 15:39, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

arbitration? You have to be joking. Why haven't you gained consensus on the WP bilateral cproject page. I am ensuring it is consistent Wight other non Mexican bilateral pages. For a while you used to put long form country names, you finally conceded and stopped doing it after I told you it was not the norm for bilaterals. LibStar (talk) 14:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I can say the same about you as to why you have not gained consensus. As to why I have not put official names in my articles is because many of them are just too long. As for the link you provided above, how is that relevant to what we are discussing. It just mentions a bunch of people who joined the group mostly in 2009 (yourself included). Have diplomatic missions resident in the into is to bulky and does not work, especially when many of them have consulates and the like. It is better (and looks better) to create a new section.Aquintero82, (talk), 15:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

if you think it is a bulky you have never ever mentioned it till now and is something you should discuss with those interested. I know about 5 editors with an active interest in bilaterals who would be happy to discuss. LibStar (talk) 14:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

So be it, arrange a discussion, however, we should also open it to the public so it is not biased for maybe because you know these individuals and therefore it wouldn't be fair.Aquintero82, (talk), 15:55, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

that's why I suggested a discussion page, in the meantime you continue to revert despite been given a formal warning, not sure why. LibStar (talk) 14:56, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I suggest that you also stop making changes. The rules apply to both of us, not just me! Aquintero82, (talk), 16:46, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi LibStar. I see that you have been editing several articles relating to foreign relations of Uruguay. In particular, you have been deleting a reference link, adding the note "Rm generic text recycled in many Uruguay bilaterals".

OK, I acknowledge that my statement "Opportunities lying ahead are enormous" is too generic. But please, don't forget that the articles are stubs, after all. Maybe you don't understand Spanish and, accordingly, cannot read the PDF file included in the link Asia-Pacific: opportunities. Please, let me explain you what it is all about.

Uruguay XXI is an Investment and Export Promotion Institute that works to help internationalize the Uruguayan economy. And, please, notice that I have no direct relationship with that institute, I only take it as a valid local reference.

The report Asia-Pacific: opportunities presents the current economic and trade trends in the Asia-Pacific region, its trade relations with Uruguay, trade opportunities and ongoing investments in our country.

Just for you to know. Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 14:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Perlis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)