User talk:Juliancolton/Archive 18

This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.

FLC nom

Hi. I've nominated the article Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of New York Mets managers/archive2. I'll notify you when I leave, and I thank you once again for doing this. Also, if any substantial issues come up, feel free to withdraw the nomination. Mm40 (talk) 02:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm leaving now. Thanks again. Mm40 (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

209.150.50.65 is still vandalizing the Wikipedia

209.150.50.65 is still vandalizing the Wikipedia, such as in these two back-to-back edits which I had to revert (trust me, only in my dreams does IE6 have a 3% usage share). Please continue to keep an eye on this IP. Samboy (talk) 15:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

FLRC maintainence

Thanks; you scared me for a second when I clicked on a blue link and it turned red! Dabomb87 (talk) 15:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest concerning the RFC on Jimmy Wales

Conflict of interest concerning the RFC on the arbitration role of Jimmy Wales in the English Wikipedia. Tony (talk) 16:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

By your own standard, weren't you then conflicted out of requesting it for the other access? Or conflicted out of reporting it to ANI? Seems a tad silly. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I was under the impression that admins only were entrusted with supporting or opposing a watchlist notice. Is this not the case? Tony (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard that, Tony. I think anyone can voice their opinion there. Only admins can edit it in, of course. –xeno^talk 17:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I screwed up. My apologies. However, I have raised the issue of the potential for cabals of editors to participate in an RFC and the watchlist application process, whether they're admins or non-admins. Sorry for the inconvenience. Tony (talk) 17:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Kwasi Nkansah

Can you userfy this? Thanks.--Giants27 (c|s) 00:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again!--Giants27 (c|s) 00:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of List of best-charting U.S. music artists

Delete was made before full 7 days of discussion. Nomination to delete commenced on 23:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC). Deletion occurred less than seven days afterward.

Please restore so discussion, which hadn't ended, can continue.

Respectfully, --Don1962 (talk) 01:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry? Seven days had indeed elapsed. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No they hadn't. Request for deletion occurred late Tuesday evening the 23rd. It has not reached the full 7 day period, and is several hours short of that. A request for rescue could have been added, as well as other discussion. Why was the hurry? --Don1962 (talk) 01:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no hurry. Seven days had fully elapsed, and the discussion was listed under the expired nominations. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. Seven full days had not fully elapsed. I'm taking this to the appeal. --Don1962 (talk) 01:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Huh? The article was nominated at 23:34, 23 June 2009, and I closed it at 00:02, 1 July 2009. That is seven days. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

That is still several hours short of seven days. It's not anywhere near Midnight, when the article was proposed for deletion. Therefore, seven days have not passed. I'm appealing it and your swiftness. --Don1962 (talk) 01:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you read the respective times of nomination and deletion? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Don1962, with respect, your mathematics is faulty. Even on the assumption that absolute precision to the exact time of nomination is required, 7 days had indeed elapsed.

Day 1 ends 23:34 24 June, 24 hours after nomination
Day 2 ends 23:34 25 June
Day 3 ends 23:34 26 June
Day 4 ends 23:34 27 June
Day 5 ends 23:34 28 June
Day 6 ends 23:34 29 June
Day 7 ends 23:34 30 June
Deletion at 00:02 on 1st July is after the end of day 7. Hope this explanation helps. Bencherlite ^Talk 01:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Today is June 30. My typing is 9:56 ET, which is 21:56 June 30, which is not a full 24 hour 7 days.

Wikipedia:Deletion review discussions:

Deletion Review discussions are typically closed after 7 days of discussion. Due to the nature of these discussions, the standards are very different from the standards followed in other discussions. Closers must be very familiar with the standards and outcomes used in the Deletion Review process.

It hasn't been 7 days. "After" would be 23:34 30 June, which has not transpired, so discussion was closed prematurely. --Don1962 (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No, you are wrong. In UTC, it is July 1. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) To avoid problems and confusion caused by editors using their local timezones, Wikipedia uses the UTC. You're mixing up your local timezone with "Wikipedia time", and if you're trying to work out how long something had been nominated for deletion, you have to use the same timezone for the beginning and the end - that's just common sense. All the dates and times I set out above are in the same time system, UTC, so there's no confusion here. 7 days had elapsed, unquestionably. Bencherlite ^Talk 02:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Wiki-Conference New York Update: 3 weeks to go

For those of you who signed up early, Wiki-Conference New York has been confirmed for the weekend of July 25-26 at New York University, and we have Jimmy Wales signed on as a keynote speaker.

There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Juliancolton. I'm a relatively new user to Wikipedia. I had a question regarding the deletion result for the article Capoeira in popular culture. It resulted in Keep. However, on the pages discussion page of the article, their is no link that can take me to that particular discussion: June 23 2009. Both links take me to the old deletion discussion in 2007. I don't want to mess around and try to fix it, but do something wrong. Can you help explain the process to me, or perhaps alter it? Maybe I am doing something wrong. Thank you for your help in resolving the discussion, and thank you in advance for any tips in using Wikipedia you can give me, or any help. Ryt 007 (talk) 13:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps July update

Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 290 articles were swept in June! Last month was our second most successful month in reviewing articles (after May). We are currently over 70% done with Sweeps, with just under 800 articles left to review. With nearly 50 members, that averages out to about 15 articles per person. If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. This may sound difficult, but if everyone completes their reviews, Sweeps would be completed in less than two years when we first started (with only four members!). With the conclusion of Sweeps, each editor could spend more time writing GAs, reviewing at the backlogged GAN, or focusing on other GARs. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Please help

I'm trying to avoid being confrontational with Michael93555. He made made a split off of one of my watchlisted articles, (Music video) which I undid because working with it would require a lot more effort that nobody really appears to be interested in giving, now. His response was inappropriate, he called me a "hater" and said that I "don't matter". Since you and Michael have a good rapport, would you please explain to Michael that reacting in such a personal way is inappropriate.Synchronism (talk) 18:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Or perhaps you have some advice about this situation for me? Any help would be appreciated, but I know you are very busy. Thanks nonetheless, Synchronism (talk) 19:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Bonnie Doon Shopping Centre

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bonnie Doon Shopping Centre. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Leonese language

Hello Julian. Like you told me, I tryed to talk to the User Rastrojo for searching an accord in leonese language. He refused, and say that his point of view is the right point of view, even he has called their friends from Spanish Wikipedia and they are absolutely trying to destroy the article. Wikipedia forbides this kind of behavior considering that actions like if they were puppets. Like you can see, I'm a member of Wikiproject Languages long time ago, I'm member of Endangered Languages Wikiproject, and even I'm trying to realive the Portal Languages in wikipedia. Rastrojo, and their friends, haven't don anything for improving the article, they just revert and revert, and even some of them not even know the English language. Please, I think this is just because of political opinions (Rastrojo is, like you can see in his page, a Castilian nationalist); they don't do anything for improving the English Wikipedia. Please, help me. I'm really disgusted and sad about that kind of bahavior. Thank you very much in advance by your help. Kinf regards, --Auslli (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Julian. Your closing of the Neda Soltan AfD is being discussed

here. ↜Just M E here , now 20:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Continental Airlines Flight 1883

Hi Julian, for some reason I missed the fact that this article, which I had created in 2006, was in AfD, and unfortunately no-one alerted me to it on my talk page. It would be very good if we can just extend the AfD as opposed to a full deletion review, and this is why I am contacting you. Reading the discussion, it seems to me the article was deleted for lack of notability. I believe that with two sources this article would meet at least two of the notability criteria specified in WP:AIRCRASH:

1. General criteria: It involves unusual circumstances: This occurrence, of an airliner landing on a taxiway is extremely rare, as attested in this Associated Press article: "Plane landing on Newark airport's taxiway a rare occurrence"

2. Air carrier criteria: It is a non-injury incident which materially contributes to a change in industry or aircraft procedures: After the incident was investigated by the NTSB, two different types of changes were instituted at and around Newark Airport: a. The lighting differentials between the taxiways and runways were increased (to reduce possible confusion between them in future); and b. Two new arrival procedures were added, to be used instead of the one which caused the incident (GIMEE 19-7-1 and GRITY 19-7-1A). See the NTSB report for more details.

In summary, as you can see in the AP article, this was an unusual and rare event, which fortunately did not result in casualties, but you can imagine what would have happened had there been a vehicle and/or personnel, or even another aircraft, on the taxiway that evening as the Continental plane landed. The FAA used this event to modify its procedures, both on the ground by changing the lighting scheme to reduce confusion, and in the air to improve the navigation to the runway. Sometime events like these, which end up with no apparent harm, end up preventing future disasters, as this one may. Anyway, please let me know if you'd like to do this via a re-opened AfD, or a full fledged DR process. Thanks, Crum375 (talk) 01:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Crum375 (talk) 01:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

NHL Entry Draft

Just to let you know, I can't do anything on this tonight. I have to go out now, so I'll work on it tomorrow. I'm sure we'll be fine if I finish it tomorrow morning. Cheers, iMatthew ^talk at 01:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of best-charting U.S. music artists

Hi Juliancolton. This AfD that you closed included comments from someone who was determined to likely be a banned editor evading their ban, User:Artyline. I'm bringing this to your attention in case you believe that this warrants re-listing the AfD. Thanks, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't forget to restore List of best-charting modern U.S. music artists while you're at it. :) Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you assist a user trying to learn more about our policies?

User:BTRUIIU. It's a little complicated. I've been corresponding with her via e-mail, and I fear I'm not well-equipped to deal with all the questions. Perhaps you can send her a message letting her know you're willing to help, or refer her to someone else? Thanks, Enigma^msg 04:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Pro-Mark wiki

I don't know why the Pro-Mark drumsticks wikipedia page was deleted.

I hadn't seen the wiki but i know that they are a very popular brand of sticks. Carters Beauford is the most popular user of Pro-mark sticks but i use them as an amateur drummer and i would just like to know why it was deleted.

Thanks

J-j-jackaka (talk) 10:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Next 2 bot proposals

Here are a couple proposals to add approved tasks to your bot...

first

Proposal: to post newsletters and notices for other WikiProjects (upon request).

second

Proposal: search/replaces to the tips of the day, for the WP:TOTD project.

The first search/replace will be to adjust the categories of the tips in the archive. There's 365 tips per year, back to 2006.

Thank you.

Good luck.

Have fun.

The Transhumanist 22:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

A question for the bot department

What kind of tasks can you do with the bot that you don't have to seek approval for?

We ran into a chore with Thehelpfulone, and they said we didn't need approval to run a bot on it. Which makes me want to know what all can be done without approval.

The Transhumanist 22:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Another HV selected picture candidate

This was recently declined for QI at Commons, but I like it and there's no reason to put it in our rotation on the portal. Daniel Case (talk) 01:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

This, by the same user, did get QI. We can use it too. Daniel Case (talk) 01:35, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Incentive system for sweeps

Hi. Because of your experience at FA and GA I was wondering what you thought if an incentive system was used at WT:FAR. Thanks YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, barnstars YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 04:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

BLP help (again)

Hey Julian, one item on this unCat says the following:

If they are redirects from a person to itself (alternative spelling, etc.) then add the appropriate coding in the article. For example

From an alternative spelling: This is a redirect from a title with an alternative spelling of the target name. Pages that link to this redirect may be updated to link directly to the target page if that results in an improvement of the text. Do not "fix" such links if they are not broken. Also, these links should not be replaced with piped links.
- There are many more specific templates such as {{R from alternative hyphenation}}, {{R from alternative punctuation}} and {{R from alternative spacing}}. Also see subcategories of Category:Redirects from modifications for other options (capitals, abbreviations, diacritics, plurals, stylizations, transliteration, ligatures, different parts of speech, etc.)

and consider removing unnecessary banners from the talk page.

In my watchlist it looked like you are the most recent BLP guru online, so you get the question ... lol.

How do I do this? Is there a page that explains it in further detail?

Article: Ann Axel redirects to Richard_Axel#Biography

Thanks ;) — Ched : ? 03:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

hmmm .. when I didn't copy the "nowiki" code it gave me a link here. is this what I'm supposed to do? Am I suppoed to remove the banners from the redirect talk page as well? — Ched : ? 03:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

(and you thought giving me a couple buttons would keep me out of everyones hair with my incessant questions huh? ... lulz) — Ched : ? 03:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that looks fine. I'm not sure about the talk page banners, though I'd assume they should be removed. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Remove the banners from the talk page. Only the articles should have talk pages. لenna vecia 04:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

vandalism-only IP

Hi Julian, care to have a look at User talk:165.228.115.59? You gave them a level 3 vandalism warning a while ago, and they're still at it. Calling Germaine Greer a pornstar! How dare they! Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I didn't know IPs changed--whenever I don't log in at work I get the same IP all the time. Oh, thanks also for doing your (volunteer) job: I see your name all the time on Recent Changes. Later! Drmies (talk) 05:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Julian

It's been a long time since this – do you remember User:Dylan620/School? I'd like to get back to that whenever you have the time. Thanks! → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 17:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright! Just a quick question, do files count? → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 18:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Allstars GFDL issue

Hi Julian - I'm offline in a mo - If you're still on for a while can I leave this with you? Sorry to dump it on you but you clearly know what you're doing and have an interest. Pedro : Chat 21:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, no problem. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks matey - also conversation at User talk:Moonriddengirl FYI. Thanks again! Pedro : Chat 21:35, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I wish I was nicer about it. Thank you for being one of the editors who spent time deleting the 4000 articles anybot created, I saw your name there. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 21:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Vancouver → Wikipedia:Featured article review/Vancouver/archive1; no redirect. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Test cricket grounds by date also needs to be g6ed. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. What am I going to do when you go on an extended WikiBreak or retire, and I submit dozens of g6s to CSD? Dabomb87 (talk) 04:33, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #27

The 27th issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

No worries. I've done it myself a few times. :) SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 04:23, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Lucy

Just noticed that Lucy (elephant) has popped back into existence. As I nominated the AFD, it would probably be a breach of some policy or other if I reverted it myself. – iride scent 15:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Reverted, and I'll add it to my watchlist. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester July Newsletter, Issue XVII

Delivered on 4 July 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 20:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Ross Zbar

I just checked Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ross Zbar, which I had commented on a while back. You closed the discussion as Delete but I do not see the consensus to delete. In particular, the last two delete comments do not acknowledge any of the sources I had found and listed above in the AfD. I don't feel particularly strongly about keeping the article--but I do think for proper form it would be appropriate to re-evaluate the discussion as "no consensus". If you still want to delete the page on a judgment call because it is a BLP and the discussion seems to lean to delete, that would be fine with me, and actually I think would probably be the outcome I would recommend--but I think closing and archiving the discussion as having a consensus to delete is inaccurate. Thanks for taking the time to read this! Cazort (talk) 01:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Tansuit

Hi! Thanks for handling the Tansuit AfD. I've got new information which I believe would indicate that merging was not the correct action. I'll present the information to you, and hope that you'll consider re-opening the AfD for further consideration.

The article "Tansuit" was written about a supposed character from Space Ghost Coast to Coast however this article already has a character listed by the name of "Tansut" or "Tansit" (the name is spelled both ways). Apparently, the name is never spelled Tansuit, and thus "Tansuit" is an improbable spelling and doesn't really warrant becoming a redirect (and thus the information, which is mostly covered in the characters list already, should not be merged). Tansit and Tansut already existed as redirects. It looks like the Tansuit article was created as an improbable misspelling, and had the article's creator known the correct spelling for the character's name, he would have been redirected to the appropriate list.

So... do you think that would warrant re-opening the AfD? or is the appropriate process to open a new AfD? or should I just let it go as acceptable cruft? — X S G 05:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

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

— X S G 05:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Tansuit

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Tansuit. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. My first DRV! How exciting! — X S G 05:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your review

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the coordinators, for your help with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews April to June 2009, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Roger Davies ^talk 12:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

Thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello

I think you are undoubtedly one of Wikipedia's most valuable admins. Would you consider running for RfB anytime soon? I would be honored to nominate Triplestop x3 02:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words; very much appreciated. The extra tools would come in useful, but personally I don't feel I've got the slightest chance at passing. Any talk page stalkers about to offer some advice? Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:30, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you think so? You are a dedicated non-controversial admin and you have plenty of experience at RfA and CHU. Triplestop x3 00:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, as I'm so active, I've developed a few enemies who would almost surely bring it down—perhaps rightly so. I might consider running towards the end of the year, though, in which case I'll be sure to let you know. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Really? You don't seem like the kind of person who would have many enemies. Triplestop x3 00:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that you would make a very fine 'crat, & I look forward to supporting an RfB. hmwith τ 00:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you would do well. As far as I can tell there aren't enough bureaucrats. (From a talk page stalker) Plastikspork (talk) 00:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd support you for sure. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

if you're up anyway...

...would you mind checking in, occasionally, on Vlachs of Serbia? There's an IP at work making very small but significant changes, and my baby is crying! Thanks, and I appreciate your good work. Drmies (talk) 05:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Oh, baby never went to sleep... Drmies (talk) 15:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Ouch. Good luck with that! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheaperbydozen block

All legal issues have been resolved, threats withdrawn. See User talk:Cheaperbydozen for an updated rq. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Unblocked? Fair enough. I was expecting you to take into account the spam/promotion, but no worries. AGF and all, I guess :-) Any questions, let me know - I'm in the IRC channel too. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 16:03, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

We'll see what happens. I'm willing to AGF on her part, but if she keeps promoting that one company and related articles, would you support a reblock? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 16:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Could either of you please be kind enough to explain to me why writing an article about related subjects would consitute spam. I'm also wondering why my question was removed. Nobody seems to understand why my articles were removed in the first place. I've asked a few editors that I know who have had a lot of experience using wikipedia and there is no grounds for having had this kind of frustration in my early attempts to contribute. As I mentioned in the comment I had left here before that seems to have disappeared, I am new. I have made contributions to these 3 related topics because the articles that I wanted to write about seemed to have all been covered and since I had been exposed to this topic through a television report recently, I thought I would give it a try. I had made a few edits adding information to the Indiana Gregg page and there was no objection to those referenced additions. When I noticed that the topics I had included had been marked in red, I decided to try to create an article. I actually spent a huge amount of time researching. I find it unfair to consider that as an attempt to try to promote one company. It is purely a starting point for learning to write wikipedia articles.Cheaperbydozen (talk) 16:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, however, I have read and re-read my article and I do not see anything that is not 'neutral'. Most of the information is 'matter of fact'and has been pulled from a dozen different references. Is there not a person I can consult with who can perhaps point out what part ot the article is deemed to be un-neutral? Has my article been targeted due to a previous deletion? I am wondering why my article about K-box was never tagged for speedy deletion and why my article for Kerchoonz was immediately tagged for deletion and why subsequently all of my contributions had been removed and blocked even in my sandbox?Cheaperbydozen (talk) 17:30, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

(After edit conflict): Could you remove the "indefinitely blocked" message from the user's page? And I'm puzzled, myself, why there is no reply to his/her question "What legal threats?", as I can't see any though may have missed something. "Legal issues have been resolved. All threats withdrawn" isn't an answer. PamD (talk) 17:34, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Legal threats were issued by this user by email to myself. See ANI. They've since been withdrawn, but I may still be 'reported to the foundation' along with several other users. Not a big issue anymore, foundation don't respond to things like that AFAIK - it'd be a matter for Arbcom or the like. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 17:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for explanation - makes much more sense now that I've seen the ANI! PamD (talk) 11:07, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXIII

Delivered by –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC).

Wikicup newsletters

[1] [2] [3] [4] Shubinator (talk) 16:42, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Err, yeah. That page is so long it was messing with AWB. Thanks for cleaning up. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:42, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. By the way, in relation to this delivery, you might want to see this. Shubinator (talk) 16:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

WikiThanks

Hi Juliancolton. I just wanted to thank you for contributing to my RfA. It wasn't one of the best RfA's held, but I've learned a lot from the experience. Sorry for sending you the message today, and not last week when my RfA was closed. I've been very busy the last time. Thanks once again! Kind regards, Lourie Pieterse 10:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow

I need to work on some policies. I'm sorry if my epic failure embarrassed you in any way, obviously I don't know very much about the contentious areas, so I'll be focusing on them. ceranthor 13:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request

Hi Julian, this user has made an unblock request. In the context of agreeing to a username change, I think s/he probably could be unblocked on a time served basis. What are your thoughts? 14:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Request to fix cut/paste moves

Please move Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge/Outline of Switzerland to Outline of Switzerland, to restore the article's edit history. And then delete Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge/Outline of Switzerland.

And the same for Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge/Outline of drawing (to Outline of drawing).

The Transhumanist 18:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me

But do you use Huggle? And how do you get the wine thing to work on a Macbook?Abce2|Free LemonadeOnly 25 cents!(Sign here) 19:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Charlie the Unicorn

Hi there - I was the primary editor of the Charlie the Unicorn article which you closed the afd for, with a delete result here. I intend on bringing it to deletion review, but wish to follow the guideline that I first bring it to the attention of the closing admin.

My primary reason for reviews are reflected in the discussion under Banjeboi's comment, as well as guidelines relating to web-specific content which states that notability is established if "The content is distributed via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster." which I have shown through the links. Distribution is not incidental (as with youtube, etc) because random uploaders can't place content on sources such as salon.com. This non-trivial distribution meets notability per the web guidelines, which most of the afd editors ignored, or didn't address. Cheers! - superβεεcat 21:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Nomination

MBisanz would like to nominate you to become a bureaucrat. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship#About RfB to see what this process entails, and then contact MBisanz to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Juliancolton . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

iMatthew really likes this. iMatthew ^talk at 01:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Second attempt in 48 hours? I approve. Plastikspork (talk) 01:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I'd be writing a co-nom right now if MBisanz hadn't said everything I was wanting to say. :D If you accept, I'll support on sight! → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 01:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Mikaey stands ready to support as well! Matt (talk) 01:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all! I've answered and accepted, so I suppose it can be transcluded whenever. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Good luck! -- Avi (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

sigh ... oh ... I suppose, ... I guess I could offer some sort of weak support - but only if I have some extra time on my hands >:) ... seriously though Julian ... Good luck! I can't think of a better qualified candidate. — Ched : ? 05:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What Ched said I was definitely waiting to see this happening, good luck! Regards So Why 06:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, I am very happy to see this discussion is in motion. Good luck! Pastor Theo (talk) 10:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Move request

Please move Outline (summary) back to Outline (over redirect). The move lacks consensus. The Transhumanist 01:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, have you discussed it with the user who preformed the move? It's probably not a good idea for me to simply revert in this case. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I've posted my objection to the talk page. I tried to revert the move, but could not because the mover (Dbachmann) redirected the original page! Therefore, I need an admin to do it for me. The discussion can continue on the talk page, but the page should be restored to the original name until a consensus has been reached for a new name. At this time, there is no consensus for ditching the original name. For the reason, you could post "move contested by The Transhumanist, restored original name until new consensus is reached". The Transhumanist 01:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedian of the Day

Congratulations, Juliancolton! For your kindness to others, your hard work around the wiki, and for being a great user, you have been awarded the "Wikipedian of the Day" award for today, July 7, 2009! Keep up the great work!
Note: You could also recieve the "Wikipedian of the Week award for this week!

Happy editing!

Midnight Comet 01:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Congrats! Glad we could be back to back. :) Cheers, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 01:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeff Hettwer Article deleted

Hi, I have just a few questions about the article Jeff Hettwer that was deleted on July 5, 2009. My account was blocked and I was unable to make the nessicary edits to the article to allow it to be saved. The block was later removed but I was asked not to respond to the discussion on the AfD. There is new information about the subject being published this week and even more to follow in the next two months. Can you tell me what the process is for regenerating the article when the new information is available? Your time is greatly appreciated. MNartist (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Rollbacker

Thank you for your support in assigning rollbacker privileges. I admire your dedication - no wonder why 7 July 2009 is your day (again) on Wikipedia! I have seen your work in the past and wholly support your nomination for bureaucrat (I had a comment, put got caught in an edit conflict. As it is getting late around 01:30, I will try again later. Glad to finally get up the courage to request rollback rights. Freedomlinux (talk) 05:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Dennis Dechaine

Why did you delete the article about Dennis Dechaine?

It was deleted after a clear consensus at our articles for deletion process. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis Dechaine for the discussion. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Charlie the Unicorn

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Charlie the Unicorn. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 13:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: AfD closures

Hi. To expound upon my response to you at my RfB, I've closed well over 2,000 AfDs with an accuracy rate of about 99%. As such, I have a large amount of experience in determining which arguments hold more water. And though it may appear I let my personal feelings get in the way, I assure you I always remain neutral when preforming administrative actions. Moreover, if my decisions are disputed, I do my utmost to discuss the matter with other editors and come to a solution. Don't mean to come across... err, what's the word?... but I hope you understand. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 12:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

How exactly did you determine the 99% figure? Is it that only 1% got overturned at DRV? Very few XfDs are ever brought to DRV, even those that were closed in a dubious manner, and out of the few that make it to DRV, many are left deleted not because the process is endorsed, but because people side with the original Delete opinions. I have closed many AfDs myself without a single overturn at DRV, but I'd never claim a 100% "accuracy rate".

While most of your AfD closures seem correct, the small sample I checked reveal an alarmingly high rate of what I can only see as a deletionist's bias. Lack of consensus is exactly that--not an invitation to cast the deciding !vote. Owen× ☎ 14:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Your RfB

I know why you are running... you want me to edit WP:Ageism!!!---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What exactly does a Buer-a-cra-te(sorry about that) do?Abce2|Free LemonadeOnly 25 cents!(Sign here) 05:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

They have the ability to promote sysops, flag bots, and rename accounts. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

asked a question---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 07:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you may hit WP:100 in less than 24 hours! Little Mountain 5 21:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

+

		The Featured Article Medal
		I never knew you had so many FAs and GAs. Obviously you haven't been enough of a self-promoting politician :) Well done ! YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 05:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks! Most of my FAs are boring anyway. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

so are mine judging by the perpetual lack of reviews YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 05:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Or maybe they're so good nothing really needs fixing! :) Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 05:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What's sad is that is the actual reason why I normally skip over YM's A-class nominations :| —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Nah, then they'd vvote straight away. If I had a personality cult following I'd get 10 support votes within 1 day. I know one guy who gets that. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 05:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well if you ever have any stagnant FACs, feel free to give me a poke. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Good luck with your RFB. Also when I clicked edit there weren't any opposes so that's why I said "Although the opposes look concerning". As soon as I saved it there was an oppose making me look a bit silly, but anyway good luck :) Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 06:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't quote me on this but I once read somewhere how you thought admins under the age of majority would more than likely not have too many friends, originally giving me the impression that you were against younger admins. Even though I've since noted otherwise from more recent comments of yours. It's incredible (tad freaky) what you write now and just imagine the articles you'll be able to churn out with even more knowledge. Hopefully other editors now don't judge you differently. All the best, Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 11:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

WooMe Deletion

You deleted the page http://wikipedia.org/wiki/woome

I believe that this was an unfair deletion. I also posted an article on Mingle2, http://wikipedia.org/wiki/mingle2, which was not marked for deletion. I would like to keep my reputation on wikipedia in good standing! What gives, I thought it was a good article? I asked for help on the article and incorporated the advice given to me, then used that advice to write the Mingle2 article.

Thanks!

Vlectronica (talk) 17:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Disc2day Deletion

You deleted the page http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc2day citing it as an advert. Disc2day is a reputable Disc duplication company and one of the largest in Arizona; I tried my best to make it as informative as possible and not sound promotional but I guess that was not enough. I feel like the article that I wrote was not a whole lot different than a similar company: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_Makers, so I am not sure why exactly it was considered too promotional. I have rewrote the article with the assistance of an outside source to ensure that it is purely informative, will I be able to repost the article without hassle?

Thanks for your time and consideration.

Rjaz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC).

Talkback

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

MLauba (talk) 21:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

AWB task

On the pages listed at User:The Transhumanist/Country outlines

replace:

=== The arts in

with:

=== Art in

Thank you.

Good luck.

Have fun.

The Transhumanist 22:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

AWB find and replace doesn't seem to be working for some reason. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I ran my script on A - K. I can do the rest when I get back from dinner. Plastikspork (talk) 00:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Please tell us more about this script of yours. We're very interested. The Transhumanist 01:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. You did it with a script from your own userspace! I've never seen scripts as subpages of monobook before. How does it work? The Transhumanist 01:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe I got all of them. The subpages thing is something that I copied from Lightmouse before I realized that this wasn't necessary. My technique for mass editing isn't the most elegant, but it works: (1) Open all the links in tabs in Firefox, (2) Cycle through the tabs with ctrl-pgdn clicking on edit on each one, (3) Cycle through the tabs pressing one of the buttons for my automatic edit script, (4) Cycle through the tabs checking each diff to make sure it worked as intended, pressing the 'save page button', (5) Close each tab. I would like to reduce a few of the steps, but I feel I still need to keep myself in the loop to avoid mistakes. A more ideal situation would be to have something like the 'regexp' replace tab, but which would perform the same action on a set of pages. I could code something up if it would be useful. It sounds like AWB works well, but I have never used that before and I don't have WinXP. Plastikspork (talk) 03:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hey, Jullian. I'm gonna ask you one thing, but you don't need to answer my question since this question does not require any string. However, I'm truly shocked to know that you're a minor. I thought you would be at least over 25, why I've thought that you may be a graduate student....But well, I once supported a very mature minor for his age to become an admin (and it past) regardless of my firm belief on minority, so why not for the second one. But are you over 15 (or in high school)? If the question is too personal, ignore it or send me email or say it bluntly... Thanks.--Caspian blue 22:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

RfB question

Greetings Mr Colton. Thanks for "going through the process" and offering to serve the community further. I was going to post a question to you, but then noticed that Seresin had posted the same question. Can I therefore ask you to respond to her/his follow-up. I have seen you claim that bureaucrats know which arguments to discount at RfA. I should therefore appreciate a more detailed explanation of what views you believe carry less weight. Some specific examples of arguments made frequently at RfA that you believe have little or at least less merit would be appreciated. Thank you in advance for your response at the RfB, I look forward to supporting your bid. Best, Dean B (talk) 23:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Doing... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

While I appreciate that you responded politely, you actually ignored the issue that I raised in my oppose thus furthering my concern. --JayHenry (talk) 01:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Just dropping in to say good luck on the RfB. 72.148.61.95 (talk) 04:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Who is actually me in disguise.... Inferno, Lord of Penguins 04:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hiox

Hi Julian, When I tagged the article for speedy deletion it's content consisted of "I am not sure why this is deleted. If a company named HIOX can not have a page in wiki why do other companies have a page. On what basis is the differentiation done."

with a prod|concern = Does not appear to be an article

Cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Dong

You got mail. --Dweller (talk) 14:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Huggle

Hi, Julian! Over my last 1700 edits, I've done mainly Huggling; to the point of using it to make nearly 500 edits just yesterday. Since you use Huggle, could you please give me a review of my Huggle work? Hoping that your RfB succeeds, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 14:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Question 5

Care to discuss? Groomtech (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi... this is an important question, in my view, that has considerable bearing on how you'd do as a 'crat. I'd like to hear your answer, or an explanation of why you choose not to answer. You can mail me privately if you prefer. ++Lar: t/c 20:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I responded at Groomtech's talk page, but I'll cross-post here: I don't feel that question is particularly relevant to this RfB. Also, I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter, so I'd rather not provide an answer at all than provide a dishonest answer. I'd be happy to take a stab at it if you think it's necessary, however. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Julian. Sorry, but I've removed my support as I feel you should answer at the RFB - even if to say "I do not wish to answer". Simply ignoring the question creates a lack of clear communication. Should others be forced to track down your response on another page? I think not. I wouldn't worry - you'll pass with flying colours - but I'm afraid I can't be among the support crowd at this time. Pedro : Chat 21:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, the questions are optional, but I'll take a shot at answering it. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The questions are indeed optional. You are correct that there is no requirement to answer. There is, however, in my opinion (and probably only mine) at least a common courtesy to acknowledge that you will either be answering or not answering on the relevant page. Please don't answer "for the sake of answering" when you have already stated you did not intend to. Such flip-flopping seems a little "off". Pedro : Chat 21:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I did acknowledge that this morning. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

My apologies Julian. I thought I had made a comprehensive check regarding your response when I clearly did not. Pedro : Chat 21:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for re-instating your support. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer to me, Julian. To expand a little... I think this question gets to the heart of what the project actually is... and what it means to have "rights". I would hope you have, or can develop, a strong opinion about the matter. If you don't, yet, please give the matter some thought. I'd appreciate it. ++Lar: t/c 21:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll think it over for a while and provide an answer later. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, if the "rights" question ever mattered to adminship or to crats, then I would be really worried and hope it stops now. "Rights" would matter to all users. If you selectively ask admin or crats, then you are giving such to them in a special manner and would make them the arbiters of basic "rights". That would create an elitest mentality. The asking of admins and crats about it would assume that it matters what an admin or crat says. That defies what WP:CONSENSUS means. Thus, I cannot support anyone who would ever require such a question to be answered and people who bother to ask such at RfA or RfB seem to be doing this community a huge disservice. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
- The crat function is a routine one which can be performed by a bot. For the most part, anyway. However, sometimes it is not routine. Be it 10% or 5% or 1% of the time, or whatever, (and I suspect we both agree, the smaller that percentage of non routine action, the better), when it is not, when judgment is required, I'd prefer that judgment be exercised by someone who has a firm grasp of what this project is about. This question gets at that whether the candidate has that grasp of project fundamentals. You may not agree, which is fine, but it is a question I would like to see this candidate answer. If answering the question, or even asking the question, garners your opposition, that's more of a comment on you than anything else, I think. ++Lar: t/c 23:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  - When bots gain the ability to judge people's statements and determine if there is something correct or not, and able to measure between a 15% margin, then I will be hunting down every machine and robot that I can find and destroying them before they take over. Thankfully, robots or "bots" are not sentient enough to make such decisions. Therefore, we still need good ol humans pushing the buttons. Now, what this project is about is everyone having the same status and people not gaining special privileges and higher class from a certain position. Therefore, Julian's position doesn't matter. It is what the community decides. Julian can be 100% for rights and the community could be again, or Julian could be 100% against and the community could be for. Regardless, I know that Julian is capable of abiding by the community. As an Admin and as a Crat, that is all that really matters. He is our servant, not the other way around. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
    - First, my point about most decisions (the 99 to 3 !votes, etc.) a crat makes being doable by a bot was not to advocate that we have bots do it. Rather it was to explain why it matters that we don't have bots in the position of crats, because the hard decisions you refer to are precisely the ones that matter the most. Sorry if that confused you. Second, you say that views don't matter, because you expect 'crats to perfectly judge consensus with no influence from their internals. In the ideal world, perhaps. But in the real world, people are influenced in their judgment by their outlook and beliefs. The best we can hope for is 'not much' influence. Hence, their beliefs matter. To me anyway. YMMV. Hope that clarifies this for you. ++Lar: t/c 00:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
      - Lar, the Crat's views don't matter because as a Crat they have given up their right to put their view forward. You chose either being a user or being a determiner of consensus. We, as a community, have come together in the bounds of consensus in order to put our faith and trust in an individual to make the right decision and be objective. We desire them to weigh the pros and the cons, to see which arguments the community upholds and which it dismisses. We look for towards those with character and the ability to sacrifice their own opinions in order to do what is best - which is to follow consensus. As such, it does not matter if Julian thinks there are rights or not. What matters is if we think there are rights or not and if Julian will uphold the community's decision. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        Your view is idealized. It would be nice if it were correct, really it would, but it is not. My view is more realistic. In the real world we are none of us perfect and we are all influenced by our views and beliefs at least a little. Some less than others (I think I'm fairly good at not being influenced, but then, who doesn't think that of themselves?) but no one is completely robotic. (if they were then US Supreme Court candidates wouldn't get the questions they do) But the question has now been answered. Not very well, but it has. At this point we may just need to agree to disagree, although I'm still fascinated that you would oppose someone for answering a question, or for asking it. ++Lar: t/c 14:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        I disagree that my view is idealized. The above is how the system works. So far, the Crats seem to follow that system. Unless you have some evidence to the contrary and can show were certain Bureaucrats have ignored community consensus and instead put up their own opinions on how things are done, then I will keep on believing the above. Now, if you did have proof to the contrary, I would recommend you taking it to ArbCom instead of showing me the harsh and true reality that your words suggest exists. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        This is not the place to debate the zen of 'cratship but you are asserting that all of our crats are not in any way, not one iota, influenced by their beliefs and opinions on matters when making judgment calls (reminder, most of the time they don't have to make such, the action is clear cut, but once in a while they do have to judge.). That assertion strikes me as obviously false, because people are not robots. Your claim is extraordinary and requires proof, while mine (that people are imperfect) is generally accepted. Next you want me to take my generally accepted claim to arbcom? For what purpose? I assert no particular malfeasance. I merely assert that people are not robots. This conversation is so surreal. You can have the last word. ++Lar: t/c 15:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        I believe that the Crats are innocent until proven guilty. If that makes me idealised? Fine, but Wikipedia works off such idealisations and is strong because of them. I do not need proof to prove anyone's innocence. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        I am guilty of being human. So are you, I suspect. Therefore imperfect, not idealised. Crats do a fine job of being impartial but I nevertheless think the question is a valid. What makes you so charming, Ottava, is how you latch on to something, see it as absolutely black or white, and then refuse to let go even when thoroughly refuted. Charming, but ineffectual in debates, because you end up in indefensible positions and don't realise it. OK you win. Crats are all ideal inhuman robots who perfectly execute every required judgment call without any prior knowledge or experience or opinion having any bearing whatever. ++Lar: t/c 16:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        Lar, I find it odd how you say I have been refuted when I have defended the idea of innocence until proven guilty. However, I will make sure the keep the above statements from you in case you ever run for some position of power, because you make it seem obvious that you believe that people in general are unable to act decent, which really goes against the idea of justice and the ideas that we hold dear on Wiki, including AGF. I haven't seen Julian apply bias in his judgments. I have disagreed with him many times, and I don't have a concern. I have also had disagreements with many Crats, like EVula, yet I have not seen anything to make me question his judgments as a Crat. I am very against people abusing power and I seek out the removal of those that do. Yet here I am, without any Crats to go after. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        You have twisted around what I said to refute some point I did not make (as per usual). My point is that people are imperfect. Not that they are "guilty". Our crats should, and do, strive for perfection in impartiality, but I know that people are imperfect. They can come close, but no person can ever perfectly achieve impartiality (or any other virtue). That does not make them guilty of anything, other than being human. I think our crats do a great job, by and large, of impartiality. And yet, I still want to know where they stand on matters, because, unlike you, I know we all are human. That's it. Go ahead and oppose whoever or whatever you like over that. Now, again, I suggest this doesn't belong here, but rather somewhere else. If anywhere. Because playing silly buggers with you is rather tiresome. ++Lar: t/c 20:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
        I find it a tad strange that you claim I am talking about you and yet all I did in the above was focus on me, me, me. Now, if you want to start attributing things I say about my own feelings as if they deal with you, feel free. However, I was sure that with all of those edit summaries that you were even admitting that the topic of the conversation was about my beliefs and perspectives, not your own. However, I do find it odd that you can think that the crats do a good job and yet want to know what they think as if it somehow matters. But yes, even Dorothy was unable to control her urge to look behind the curtain. However, I don't believe in movies as reality so I don't expect a wizard putting on a show. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

← Done; answered. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Commendation

I would like to offer my praise for the manner in which you are handling your RfB. I don't care how old you are -- you are someone that people can and should look up to. Pastor Theo (talk) 03:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

↑ I'm glad this guy's getting the mop. wadester 16 04:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. It is rather stressful, but it's actually going better than I expected so far. As an aside, best of luck for the remainder of your RfA; your mop is being prepared. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

You should take a look at the nightmare that was my RfB ;-) JC has it easy ;-)---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, at least you had the guts to self-nom! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

won't be making that mistake again anytime soon ;-) Oh wait, I just re-read my enemies list you are on it... perhaps I should change my !vote ;-)---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm in the neutral section, actually, which means I'm only partially an enemy. I'd gladly support if you ran for RfB again now, however. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought you were in the oppose section... oh well... as for supporting today, thanks for the vote of confidence, but I don't think I'll be running any time soon. I'm enjoying what I'm doing right now... and at the present time, and based upon the nature of the opposes, I am dubious about the community ever supporting me for 'crat. There are some people who simply never will be (even if they would do a good job) and right now, I see myself in that category.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

If we're comparing notes, being completely biased, I still think that the 29 questions here aged me a few years :} -- Avi (talk) 04:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that the three questions here aged me 7 days. ;) (X! · talk) · @248 · 04:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I second Pastor Theo. You lead by example, which is far from what many people over the age of 18 (30, 60, 97, etc) can say for themselves. It's a gift really; use it wisely and widely. wadester 16 04:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Mr. Colton. And if your Wikipedia handle is a pseudonym, forgive my old-fashioned politeness in addressing you that way, but I have deep respect for people who conduct themselves with maturity and grace. I am genuinely sorry to hear that your experience is stressful. Sadly, the world is not lacking in people who take pleasure in denying pleasure to others. If it is any comfort, the overwhelming number of people who have participated in this discussion have been extremely supportive of your work. I am in your corner -- call on me if you ever need me. Peace be with you! Pastor Theo (talk) 04:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I haven't been very active lately, but I just came by to support your RfB (which I've been expecting for a while). To be honest, I'm not surprised you're young - I don't think you lack maturity, but for some reason, something about you has always sort of reminded me of AD for some reason. I've always envisioned you as some editor in his late teens or early twenties with spectacles, a nice smile, and a very strong interest in hurricanes. Not sure what you'll make of me saying that, but you're still a very good administrator. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 08:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks! Yeah, that basically describes me. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Now I understand why I thought of you that way - you share your name with an anime character named Julian. =) http://images.absoluteanime.com/card_captors/julian.jpg Master&Expert (Talk) 19:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Dude ...

WP:100 in 24 hours? .... that is seriz bizniz! Haz to be a record! — Ched : ? 05:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Nope... DMHO's RfA had it's 166th support exactly 24 hours after the first support was past... and we know how that one fared.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Another reminder that truth cannot be found in numbers. Although I would not compary DHMO's RFA to this RFB (although you never know, RFBs tend to attract even more drama than RFAs unfortunately). Regards So Why 07:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

curses ... foiled again. ;-) — Ched : ? 07:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

On the whole, RFB's tend to have higher vote counts... where many people running for admin might be somewhat unknown, it is rare to find somebody running for crat who is unknown. Which actually makes it harder to predict what will happen at an RfB. RfA's the candidate has the advantage that they are somewhat anonymous, but with RfB there is a greater likelihood that you've pissed somebody off and they remember exactly where/what it was.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, as far as I know that's a record for RfB, so I'm still pretty happy with that. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The highest number of supports for an RfB on record is Riana's RfB - which, while the tally was above 200, closed unsuccessfully. Hopefully yours won't be unsuccessful - even though there's opposition, I doubt it will. Master&Expert (Talk) 19:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh!

I had no idea you'd be running for bureaucrat :) This is what I get for being away for months on end. Good luck! Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat 14:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not going so well at the moment, but hopefully I can keep it afloat for the next five days. In any event, thanks for the support; it's much appreciated. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Not well, you're at 84%. ceranthor 14:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I am more than surprised to see this turn of events. Seeing you take such hits with that track record, I cannot begin to imagine anyone wanting to try RFB after reading your request. While I admit that cratship indeed has and needs stricter and higher standards than adminship, I do think it goes a bit too far in your case and I want to wish you all the best in enduring it. Regards So Why 16:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It has not been called the "death of 1000 cuts" for nothing

-- Avi (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit surprised as well, but the community knows best I suppose. But it's only two days in, and anything can happen. Thanks for the comments all. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I know that I would not want to run... but I do know of 5 people who have asked me about for my thoughts on their running for RfB... one of whom I think would be a shoe in... one who I think would withdraw quicker than I did. I'm just waiting to see if any of them actually run.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

RfB Question

I had asked a further question on #12. Do you intend to answer it? ÷seresin 18:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sorry for the delat; I've just been taking a while to think it through. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Plantain_Walk,_Jamaica

Per feedback, the image you reviewed now illustrates the biography of the artist and a different image illustrates the History of Jamaica article. You may wish to change your review based upon these alterations. Durova²⁷³ 19:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Chris Parmelee

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chris Parmelee. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 19:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey

~~I've asked you a new question at your RfB. Cheers, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 21:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)~~

After thinking about it, I removed my questions. There were meant as an expansion of Q11; the answer to which has garnered opposition for your RfB. I do not want to run the risk of contributing to any failure of your RfB (though I most certainly hope you pass). Cheers, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 00:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The DHMO question may well be the hardest question asked on RfBs—at least in my experience. -- Avi (talk) 01:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I always found it the easiest - insta fail. But if you want to be totalitarian, a simple CU of all participants would definitely end up with quite a few blocks for iffy things going on there. Even if the CU is clean, there are more than a dozen who are easy to spot that deserved a good block. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ottava, by all means, file an SPI report, but to summarily CU all participants is against the foundation and local EnWiki policy. -- Avi (talk) 14:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Calgary Flames vandalism

The bastard is persistent, isn't he? I've put in a request on WP:ANI to see if someone can rangeblock this user's IPs. Cheers, Reso lute 01:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

News and notes: Commons grant, license change, new chapters, usability and more
Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia and kidnapping, new comedy series
WikiProject report: WikiProject Food and Drink
Features and admins: Approved this week
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I always like to know when I mess up :P; that one was an accident. -Falcon8765 (talk) 03:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Seth and Leah Clearwater actors have been determined

Seth is played by actor Tyler Posey and Leah Clearwater will be played by unknown actress Sydney Lila Spencer. The official press release of this info will be made by Summit on July 19th, 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Twilight01010 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

New optional Q for you

Julian, as I mentioned in my neutral vote I suspect we have different views on what adminship is about, that being said, basing my opinion on one single exchange is probably not doing you justice. I'd appreciate if you wanted to expand on the topic a bit.

Cheers, MLauba (talk) 10:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

GAN mentoring

Hi Julian. Lately I've been toying with the idea of getting involved in GA reviewing and I wondered how you'd feel about mentoring me. I should say up front that I'm fairly busy with ~~real life~~ other important things, so if you mind it being a slow / gappy process you should say no now. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 16:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Hmm, how about if I pick a nominee, draft a review, and post it in user space to get your feedback before making it 'official' - does that sound good? Also if you have any general advice beyond what's encapsulated here I'd be grateful to hear it. Olaf Davis (talk) 19:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I've made a start on a review here. Perhaps you could check in every so often to make sure I'm not on wildly the wrong track or give any comments that come to mind, and otherwise I'll come to you if I have any questions.

Speaking of questions - if I find really small points, like grammar or a broken wikilink, is it fine to fix them myself or should I leave them and just mention them in the review so that the question "is Olaf secretly a major contributor to this article?" remains easy to answer? Olaf Davis (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind that question - I should RTFM. Olaf Davis (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Piledhigheranddeeper

You wrote: I've long been intrigued by your username, and I wanted to ask where it actually came from. It sounds to me like a sandwhich... :) –Juliancolton | Talk 01:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

To which was added: None of my business, but see the old joke at Piled_Higher_and_Deeper#Parodies As always, Smallbones (talk) 03:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, Smallbones is hot on the trail. It is indeed a reference to my Ph.D. degree, and a joke as to the mound of crap involved. I'm struck that anybody would be paying attention for a "long" time!--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I have to admit now that I have been wondering about your username for some time, too. I won't tell you what it always initially made me think of! Maedin\^talk 15:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Maedin, that is actually part of the joke. A BS = Bull sh$$, A MS = More of the Same, PHD = Piled Higher and Deeper. -Djsasso (talk) 16:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I realised that when I made my comment, but I had previously been thinking of engineering. Being in engineering myself, I seem to see the references everywhere! It's a little embarrassing, when everyone else is talking about shit, to admit that you had been thinking of piling rigs, ;-) Maedin\^talk 18:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

haha Thats hilarious. Woops! Thanks a lot and good luck with your RFB!--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 18:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

RightFirmRightNow Page's Username

Thanks for your message. We'd really prefer just to use our firm's name (Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr, P.C.) but it has been blocked. "Right Firm. Right Now." is our firm's current trademark. Is there any way we can use our firm's legal name instead or just "Munsch Hardt," as that is what we are known as in the marketplace? Many thanks again, RightFirmRightNow —Preceding unsigned comment added by RightFirmRightNow (talk • contribs) 20:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Outline Update - Exhausted - 07/10/2009

I'm sorry that I haven't been available to assign tasks lately. For the past 3 days (not including today) I've been almost totally consumed in discussions concerning the location and very existence of outlines. Today I finally broke free and got back to work on outlines. Felt good.

A great deal has been happening with outlines and behind the scenes. I just don't have time to tell you all about it this time around. Here's the best I can do...

How to watch what's going on with outlines

If you'd like a bird's eye view of everything that's happening with respect to outlines, see this page:

WP:OOKWL - watchlist for copying and pasting into your raw watchlist.

Or go to these pages (and click on "Related changes" in the sidebar's toolbox menu):

WP:OOKRC - a version of the above watchlist for use with "Related changes".
WP:OOKDIR - a list of key pages related to the OOK, along with their shortcuts.
WP:OOKDISC - list of discussions pertaining to outlines.

Recently converted to outlines

These outline articles, which were named "List of...", have been converted to an OOK format:

Outline of martial arts (was "List of martial arts-related topics")
Outline of wine - converted by Stefan (was called "List of wine-related topics")
Outline of the creation-evolution controversy (was "List of topics in the creation-evolution controversy")
Outline of actuarial science (was "Actuarial topics")
Outline of industrial organization (was "List of topics in industrial organization")

Recently merged into outlines

There are a lot of "List of" articles that are outlines. Some of them are on the same subjects as the "Outline of" articles. The following one have been recently merged:

List of finance topics into Outline of finance

The Transhumanist 01:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

question

For folks that are interested in closes. I posted a question about adding a close date and time to XfD items: *posted at: XfD thread — Ched : ? 14:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

RfB

I felt slightly ungenerous in putting in my Oppose, but it's what I feel at the moment. (In a year or two, sure.) For the record, I think you're a fine admin and I've noticed that your featured nominations have improved significantly. It's something to be proud of for someone so young. PS Moni's comment about trying a few structural, textural variations in the hurricans and roads FA nominations is well worth considering, although it's not relevant to the RfB, I think. Cheers. Tony (talk) 14:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Fully understood, and your concerns are indeed valid. Thank you for participating at the RfB, and I look forward to working with you in the future. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, that's terrible. I'm sorry this is the case, and even though I don't understand why the exact age would make you more vulnerable, I would assist you to fend off nasty users/attacks if were ever in a position to do so. YouTube? You're joking ... obviously not. Tony (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the WMF should encourage editors to use their real names. I go half-way there with my first name, and my surname is easily recoverable from refs. Plus I use my pic. Would make the community more trusting, I think. If they did encourage, I'd use my full name. In all these years of operating in war zones here, I've not once received a negative email; but then, I don't have to deal with difficult cases such as you admins do. Tony (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Would you be willing to help?

Hello, Julian! I would like to ask if you would be my co-mentor if I wind up mentoring Flameviper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)/Ziggy Sawdust (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).

Here's the story: Sarah (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) posted a ban review for User:Flameviper at WP:AN, which can be located here. Consensus appears to be in favor of Flameviper's reinstatement, but on one condition: A volunteer must step forward and mentor Flameviper. After I volunteered here, KillerChihuahua (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) queried me on whether or not I was ready to mentor Flameviper. After I replied (feeling confident that I was prepared), KC posted here asking the community if it thought that I would be a good mentor. Durova (talk · contribs) commented at the sub-thread commenting that I would be better off with a co-mentor, and I agree with her. The rest is a dramatic argument between Durova and KC that I doubt you'd be interested in hearing about.

So, in summary, would you mind if we partnered up as co-mentors if Flameviper is unblocked? (Note that he may also be unblocked under the alias "Ziggy Sawdust.") Cheers, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 00:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Dylan. At the moment I don't think I'd be suitable to mentor him, so it'd probably be best to contact another admin. I'd be willing to answer any specific answers you have, however. Good luck! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand. Firestorm, Mazca, and Shell have already offered help (which I very greatly appreciate), so I think I'm set anyway. :) Thanks for the good luck wishes! Best, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 01:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Dramatic argument? Hardly. Durova drama? yeah. But also, several other editors, some admins, have also stepped up and offered to co-mentor. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 00:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

With all due respect, I think that was a bit uncalled for. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Seconding Julian here. KC, I'm flattered that you have so much faith in my ability to (single-handedly!) mentor Flameviper, but I can't help but feel that your incivility toward Durova is getting just a bit out of hand. Best, → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 01:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Apologies if my responses are slow today; am multitasking and working with a 150MB image. Please ping me about the other mentors and would gladly switch to support the proposal, if it looks feasible. And Dylan, if you take this on feel free to ping me from time to time if you'd like ideas and a sounding board. Mentoring is hard work! Best wishes all, Durova²⁷⁵ 01:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Any talk page stalkers around?

WP:NODRAMA –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Great idea. Can we start earlier? Plastikspork (talk) 04:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Awww crap .. now I'm gonna have to do something worthwhile. ;) — Ched : ? 06:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

User:TomasBat/Four Award

First off, congrats on promoting 1941 Florida hurricane to featured article status. I just so happen to get very lucky, by having the article start at the very start of Category:Wikipedia Did you know articles that are featured articles, and nominating you for this very rare award. The award is awarded to a user who has contributed to an article by creating it, DYK nominating it, good article nominating it, and featured article nominating it, with all of them passing their nominations. Again, congrats, and happy editing! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 07:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your 20 featured articles! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 18:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Cough, cough

This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous.
Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.

OK Julian, I've decided to take you under my wing (so to speak). Should your current RfB fail for some ridiculous reason, I will assist you in the task of resolving all the concerns stated in the "oppose" section.

First - clearly state on your user page that you were born in 1957, we all know that any declaration of age is a fact, and that the content of your edits are clearly not indicative of your abilities or maturity.
Second - STOP doing positive things such as closing AfD items. It has become obvious that engaging in activities that improve the content of WP are not a desired quality for a 'crat.
Third - deny any existence of a life outside Wikipedia. Ye who shall be known as a person who would dare to communicate through IRC, have a blog, own a webpage, or even think of speaking outside of WP shall be eternally banned from the boring, tedious tasks of "cratship".
Fourth - acknowledge that "cratship" is a "holy grail". It doesn't matter that ascension only means that you can "close an obvious RfA", or help someone change their moniker - "IT" means you are somehow the eternal guardian of .. what? .. a website?
Fifth - don't ever attempt to discuss an issue with someone who has an opposing point of view. Any attempt to display "logic" will be quickly seen as "badgering".

Promise; you have. Talent; you can offer. Fear of truth, the dark side has. The sound of your supporters, you should see. — Ched : ? 07:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Suppper Three Ps Endorse. ceranthor 10:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

haha, excellent advice indeed! That really cheered me up. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXIV

Union Turnpike (Hudson County, New Jersey)

Thanks for your feedback. Never had so much feedback on so small, new article. The name has been changed again. I can live with it all. Seems though that image will not appear if made large than 30px, which I can also live with.Djflem (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Help with New Netherland info box

There has not been a war, but there is a stalemate, and the article is stuck. DATES. The idiosyncracy of New Netherland is that once New Amsterdam was surrendered to the British in 1664, the arrangement was conditionally formalized with the Treaty of Breda in 1667. The Dutch later (1673) recaptured the territory renaming it New Orange, which was formally and finally reliquished to the British in 1674 with the Treaty of Westminster. The beginning dates are also complicated. Henry Hudson discovery in 1609. New Netherland Company in 1614. Dutch West India Company in 1621. Governors Island, first "offical" settlement and status a province of Netherlands 1624. When did this colony begin and end? I cannot make this info fit in infobox template, and i'm way too computer illiterate to try to change it. Help! Suggestions?? Would be really appreciated.Djflem (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but I'm really not sure. You might be better off asking MZMcBride (talk · contribs), as he's quite good with templates. Sorry I couldn't be of greater assistance. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Julian, thanks for the revert of vandalism to my user page. Cheers! Geoff ^T ^C 22:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem, glad to help! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

re My RfB

Thanks for the note. I don't think I'm likely to get the sort of answer I'm looking for, so I have no particular further requests about that line of question. I do, however, have a new one, if you wouldn't mind. Would you mind explaining what you meant here? Does this mean you would have closed the RfA the same way? ÷seresin 01:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:CHU

Sorry about that. I've only been clerking there for two days now (decided to get some expereince elsewhere on the wiki), so I'm still learning. I'm assuming if there is a user with a real name and no reason, would you just go "{{CHU|note}} Please provide a reason. Also, are you aware of the implications of using your real name?"? -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 05:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm assuiming you then mean to only use Template:CHU once? -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 05:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

If I may, I would like to have the "Mass cremations in India"

...article that was deleted in June restored into a sandbox in my user space. The Human rights in India article needs help.- sinneed (talk) 06:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

And I thank you very much. - sinneed (talk) 06:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

question

What happens to the talk pages of indefinitely blocked users (for vandalism or sockpuppeteering)? Griffinofwales (talk) 06:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It depends, but they're usually deleted after a while, if I recall correctly. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast response. Between the time of block and the time of deletion, are the pages blanked and replaced with an indef block template? I will respond later. Griffinofwales (talk) 06:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Please Help!

Hello,

I'm not sure you know me, but I wanted to ask you to close a debate that was withdrawn in WP:AfD. It's the one on Jefferson and Slavery. The author would greatly appriciate it, and I think you're one of the best admins out there. I also wanted to send my support for your RfB. Good luck fighting the ageists!

Gosox5555 (talk) 14:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Another request

Hi Julian. I know you must be busy dealing with your RFB, but I have another request regarding an RFA deletion. I've come across another declined RFA nom. If you have the time, would you mind speedily deleting it? Thanks. Tim meh 03:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Done... I'm not really thinking about my RfB too much at this point, as the result is all but clear. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Even if your RFB fails, you'll at least have bragging rights to being only the second candidate to get more than 200 support !votes. :) Tim meh 00:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well looky here...

Only the second RfB in Wikipedia history to reach WP:200 – congrats, pal! :D → Dylan 620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 17:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

He gets by with a little help from his friends. (But not really, :P) iMatthew ^talk at 17:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Yay. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Black Hawk War

I stumbled across this while working on my latest USMA list and it's in pretty good shape. I've started fixing it up and listed it at Good Article Noms. Any help would be appreciated. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Credit Management

You had closed the AfD as delete and deleted the page, however during the course of the AfD, the page was moved to Credit management where it currently exists. Can you take a look? -SpacemanSpiff {^Calvin_Hobbes 01:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Storm King Highway pic

Sure, go ahead. (Did you see that I got the Dutch barn pic, or rather a newer version with less compression per the reviewer's request, promoted to QI? It's my first; I think I'll go for the Brewster church pic next). Daniel Case (talk) 03:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Your question

Hola, Julian, thanks for the question. I will be going offline shortly and might remain so for the rest of the RfA for off-wiki reasons, and so probably won't have the time to do your question justice. Is it more important to you that you get a full answer (in which case I might wait until later in the week when I am back online and have had time to absorb), or a stream-of-consciousness one (in which I can splutter off something incoherent on the spot)? Cheers, Skomorokh 04:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

That's fine; if you don't have time or if you'd rather not answer it, no problem. I was just interested to hear your thoughts, but you can be assured my support stands regardless. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No, I certainly intend to answer it, except I have an international flight in four hours and seem to have forgotten to sleep. My most immediate response to this particular RfA is failure to recognise the person being discussed in each of the support, oppose and neutral sections, and bewilderment at the balls those concerned chose to pick up and run with. Not at all the "week in Hell" as advertised, but a very odd experience nonetheless. Will elaborate once repatriated and well-slept, and thanks for your support. Mahalo, Skomorokh 04:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, cool, thanks. I can say from experience that sleep is a top priority at times like these! Have a good flight, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Tropical Storm Dottie (1976)

On July 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tropical Storm Dottie (1976), 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 09:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy note

WP:Bureaucrats' noticeboard#Query. hmwith τ 13:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ping!

~~You've got new messages at Commons. Cheers, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 16:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)~~

Turns out all I had to do was wait for the picture to load. My apologies, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 16:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Zarai Taraqiati Bank Ltd.

The HighKing He made edits with out have any knowledge and remove the important things, we are in process to put references in order to strong the article, please help us as we created this article with so many work hard. --AhmadJawad (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Aurora country club

You had closed the AfD as keep and noted on the article talk page, but I guess forgot to remove the AfD tag. I've done so now, but let me know if my edit isn't in order. -SpacemanSpiff{^Calvin_Hobbes 18:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Your comment

here is a hurtful accusation regarding my desires, which you cannot possibly know. I assure you that you are mistaken. We disagree; this in no way indicates that, as you put it, I "do not wish to have a professional and honest conversation". I am deeply disappointed in that slur and would appreciate it if you would strike it. I understand that you do not consider your mulitple accusations that I "falsely accuse" you to be accusations of lying on my part, and will accept that you view that to be an alternate way of saying "you are mistaken". I disagree utterly; I find such accusations to be virtually indistinguishable from accusing me of lying in order to harm, which I am not and have never been guilty of. However, there can be no misunderstanding when you presume to tell me what my "desires" are, especially as you again accuse me of some form of dishonesty, saying I do not "desire... honest conversation". KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 18:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I no longer wish to engage in this discussion. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

As you wish, then. I have one last comment to leave you with: You wish to be a 'crat, but you have no problem making multiple insults and accusations and refusing to explain them? This is unexpected. I knew you and I disagreed on some things; I had no idea you would also merrily insult me and then refuse to explain or withdraw your insults. I am done here. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 18:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No, not at all. I intend to insult nobody. Please stop accusing of me such. Thank you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ack, I thought we were done, but Julian, you are in error - I did not say that you intended to insult - only that your statements did insult. On my talk page, I even suggested alternate phrasing; "You are in error" or "you are mistaken" when you think someone is wrong but not malicious, explaining that your phrasing means "maliciously lie" to me, as well as giving you several dictionary synonyms to clarify why. I'm not accusing you of anything but what you said, which was hurtful and insulting to me. This is not an accusation; it is information. Do with it as you will; if you continue to misunderstand me at least I've tried, and tried hard, to reach an understanding. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 19:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well if I somehow offended you, I apologize. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, you did, and thanks very much for the apology, and if you are unclear on how your words hurt me, then I will be more than happy to go over it at your convenience. For future reference, "false accusation" generally means "maliciously lie" so if you mean to agf, the two phrases I suggest above are insult-free. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 19:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, "false accusation" specifically means "an accusation that is not true." There is a very big difference between telling someone they said something that is untrue and saying they lied. As Julian noted, lying infers intent. In that you went on the defensive and stated he called you a liar, you've done far more to cast yourself in a negative light than you've done trying so hard to cast Julian in one. لenna vecia 20:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

KC, your removal of comments from your talk page, your inappropriate posting of smears, your constant assuming of bad faith and attacking Julian in multiple forums only verifies that you are not here for an honest discussion. You are walking on very thin ice right now and you wont stop. Stop your insults. Stop your attacks. Stop spreading rumors and innuendos. Stop attacking the very foundation of Wikipedia and Consensus. Stop treating people like crap. Just stop. Perhaps a wikibreak would be in your best interest. I don't know what got into you, but you haven't acted the same for quite a while. You were a great person, and I wish that great person was still around. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Seriously. Well-stated, Ottava. Not to mention the new arguing over semantics. This is nothing more than pathetic baiting. Just leave him alone. Go do something productive instead of constant drama-mongering. It's pathetic. لenna vecia 19:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

my edit

MY apologies, then. I didn't see how the one making the edit was involved in the discussion deleted. Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Delete Articles and Pictures: How?

Sorry to interrupt you, but can you please tell me how to delete Articles and Pictures? Respond on my talkpage. Secret Saturdays (talk) 02:41, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for The Fall of Robespierre

On July 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Fall of Robespierre, 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 03:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Just saying

Julian, I'm sorry your RfB didn't stay above +90%. I know it was only a couple extra things in regards to closing stuff and all, and I don't understand why it's such a big deal to folks. Hey, I was a network admin. for a 6 server, 135 workstation network - and I find the whole thing ridiculous. You do damn fine work, and I admire what you do, as well as what you've done. You've been through this RfX crap before, so you know that it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. I know that doesn't take the sting out of it - but trust me, you have far more exciting and adventurous things ahead of you in life. You're one of the good peeps dude - don't forget that. — Ched : ? 07:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for France: An Ode

On July 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article France: An Ode, 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.

rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 09:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Green Bloggers AfD

Hi, I see that you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Bloggers (2nd nomination) as merge--which makes perfect sense to me. But I'm wondering why you also deleted the article. As far as I'm aware (as per WP:MM and other things), both the source and destination pages legally need to be kept, so that the full contribution (i.e., attribution) history remains intact, with the source page simply redirected to the destination. Again, I have no qualms with the "merge" closure, but would suggest on purely procedural grounds that the article be restored and then redirected to Green Party of Canada; otherwise the history of the merged material will not be traceable by non-admins. Thanks, Cosmic Latte (talk) 13:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for letting me know. Cosmic Latte (talk) 14:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for The French Revolution (poem)

On July 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The French Revolution (poem), 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 15:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Wind and Snow star

Thanks for the barnstar. This snow GAN attempt is turning more into a FAC considering the amount of editing I'm needing to make, but it's improving the article so that's all that matters. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Tapah

Could you please tell me what I should fix in the article to get it better so I can nominate it for GA?

Thanks --An ha mi rak 20:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe that I have finished what you asked me to do, could you now tell me what else I need to do?

Thanks --An ha mi rak 20:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I fixed the grammar. (Although I'm sure I missed some) --An ha mi rak 21:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Letters on a Regicide Peace

On July 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Letters on a Regicide Peace, 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 21:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Wuhwuzdat

Hi, Mr C. I wondered if you could take a look at the above user. You seemed to have been involved earlier on today, and Prodego doesn't seem to be around. I'm sure it's all just a big misunderstanding and we can carry on after a strong cup of tea. Much appreciated. :) – B.hotep •talk• 22:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Happy Bastille Day!

Dear fellow Wikipedian, on behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just want to wish you a Happy Bastille Day, whether you are French, Republican or not! :) Happy Editing! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 22:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Admin coaching

Hey Julian, could my next admin coaching lesson be on what to do if I nominate pages at XfD? I ask because I recently screwed up huge at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:T'Shael/lynch (nominated page now located at User:Javert/lynch). Luckily, all is well. :)

As an extra detail I think you should know about, I was recently offered a nomination for adminship by another user, but I declined due to the above MfD and because you're still my coach. Best, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 11:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Wick (whistleblower) (2nd nomination)

I have nominated John Wick (whistleblower) for deletion. The AFD discussion and reasoning for this can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Wick (whistleblower) (2nd nomination).

I am notifying you since you either created the article, were significantly involved in its editing, or were the nominator or closer of the original deletion discussion. If you are interested in this, please participate by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 14:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll add the AfD to my watchlist. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Your RfB

On this occasion, your RfB did not succeed. I hope that you will continue your excellent contributions to Wikipedia and may consider standing again in future. Remember, a substantial majority of editors commenting did support your nomination, and I considered that, while you did not gain the level of consensus required, you came closer than a percentage might suggest. Warofdreams talk 09:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Unlucky mate. I'm almost certain that in perhaps a year of editing and admining (if that's a word?) you'll easily pass an RfB, perhaps with WP:300... My condolences, and while I pulled out of support this time, on improvement I will happily support if you keep up your excellent record of adminship for some time. Remember - don't let this get you down. weburiedourdramainthegarden 10:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, sorry to see it fail. Some of the opposers did have good points, and in my view some didn't - but there's plenty of constructive criticism you can work on. The opposition over your age, while probably expected, is something that time will solve if nothing else. Additionally, I think some of the opposes came from unfortunate timing of having your RfB occurring right in the middle of our most recent disputed RfA close. The rest of the complaints brought up are generally things you can take on board - hopefully we'll see you as a 'crat before too long, all the best. :) ~ mazca ^talk 10:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Chin up, in a few months there will be no problems. Aaroncrick (talk) 10:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I must say I am extremely disappointed that your RfB failed. You would have been a truly great addition to the bureaucrat team. With the strongest support for your next attempt, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 10:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth: I would have supported your nomination had I not been on wikibreak. I do hope that, after working on any legitimate concerns that were raised, you'll consider running again in the months ahead (perhaps at the end of this year? ;-)). Regards, AGK 11:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I am also a little disappointed your RfB did not pass, I hope you try again in the future. Camaron · Christopher · talk 11:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Ahh well. Good try. Better luck next time. MBisanz ^talk 11:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hope the last RFB doesnt let you down.. 226 support votes is infact the testimonial of appreciation of your good efforts ..Do continue your good contributions at Wikipedia... Yes, Better luck next time.... -- Tinu Cherian - 12:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Disappointing, but do focus on the level of support! --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 12:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all for the comments, and to Warofdreams for making the close. I haven't quite decided whether I'll be running again, but I'll certainly consider it over coming months. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

You can so many supports that it was ridiculous. I can't believe that you didn't pass. Better luck next time (which better occur)! hmwith τ 14:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I'm scratching my head over what happened there. I'm sure you'll do better next time; AGE DOESN'T MATTER. (I'm younger than you :D). There's nothing time won't fix :-). Regards, Airplaneman (talk) 15:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Apparently children should be deleted anyway ;) ~ mazca ^talk 15:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Why do I think that it was a children [sic] that wrote that? Maybe the poor grammar? :) (X! · talk) · @485 · 10:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I think you were one of the most exemplary candidates for bureaucrat we've had in a while. It was a crying shame you didn't pass, especially due to some opposers (not all of them) having very weak points. Don't let the geezers get you down. ;) Meetare Shappy ^Cunkelfratz! 15:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

What about the friendly geezers? :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I too was sorry to see that your RFB failed. If you choose to apply again, please let me know!AlexandrDmitri (talk) 15:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that I thought this was something of a travesty. It seemed to me that your maturity was questioned, and then you were needled and harassed to the point where a chink in your "maturity armor" appeared (totally understandable, under the circumstances) and this was exploited by some apparently mean-spirited folk. To me, it seemed like an awful lot of fuss for getting the 'crat tools, with concerns more relevant to administratorship than bureaucratship. Let me know if there are plans to try again so that I can invest a bit more time in putting up some stronger support. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey there. I didn't get to vote in your RfB, but I've just had a look through it and wanted to commend you for your decorum. You held your head high through what's probably an unpleasant experience and that counts a lot toward "maturity" in my book. I've seen you take criticism well in FAC as well, and these are areas that can boil the blood of any editor regardless of age. Keep up the good work and I hope to see you run again in the future if you want the duties. --Laser brain (talk) 15:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I hope you give it another shot, and good luck. - Dank (push to talk) 15:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
My late condolences, you would have passed had it not been for some frankly ridiculous opposes. I hope to see you there again in a year or so :) Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat 15:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Going through the opposes, it appears that "time is on your side," in that it will lessen/eliminate the "hasn't been an admin for long enough" and "isn't old enough" opposes. I hope you don't let it get you down, and seriously consider running again in six months or so. All the best. Plastikspork (talk) 16:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't let the opposition and stress bring you down; failing an RfX /= "you're a bad editor". Please consider running again in 7–8 months or so, as I estimate. I really think that you'd have a very good shot once some of the issues (general admin experience for a total of 1 year, better AFD closure reasons) are resolved over time. I see crat potential, so good luck with everything. :-) Jamie^☆S93 16:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to see your RFB fail, Julian. Just take the opposers' advice to heart and I'll support even more strongly the next time, and I'm sure they will too. Tim meh 17:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry as well Julian. As stated above, apply the advice given and I'll be there when you decide for another go around as a friendly geezers of support. Shinerunner (talk) 20:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I was very glad to support this RfB and I will be equally happy to support the next one. You have impressed many people, and I am in awe at the high number of supporters who came out to cheer you on. Keep doing what you are doing, because you are doing something wonderful. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

As someone of your age, I too will face the age issue in my planned RFA. I couldn't believe what some of the editors thought about you. You just barely failed, which amazes me. If you wanted to, you could probably skip the year and wait 4-6 months, but there's no guarantee in any success. Good luck on your next RFB, I'll be rooting for you. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Also disappointed at the result. I am sure it would pass with such an overwhelming number of supports. If you ever run again(Which I hope you do) I will once again lend my strong support and I am certain the result will be different.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 01:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I, too, must offer my support, even as I was an opposer at RfB (although I considered changing my !vote notwithstanding my true sentiments in order to counteract opposes that I regarded as frivolous, hating to see us reach the result I thought right for reasons that I thought wrong). That most of the opposes, including mine, were reluctant, and that almost all reasonable editors recognize your value to the project will, I hope, be of some consolation. Yours is, even as as the RfB might not have been your finest hour, a winsome personality, and you are eminently capable—over this there is, you will have observed, little disagreement—and so although I cannot say for certain that I will offer my support should you submit yourself again—it may be that we simply differ over the role of the bureaucrat and more generally over how to interpret consensus-based discussions—I am quite confident that RfB 2 will pass, and I confess that I will probably hope for that outcome. Cheers, Joe (talk) 03:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Bummer YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
As an opposer I echo some of the comments of Joe. I cannot see how this will fail again if you give it another 6-12 months and take on board some of the points made in the RfB. I don't like opposing but I must say that as the process went on I became more resolute because of some of the unnecessary attacks on the opposers (not ones made by you though). Polargeo (talk) 08:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Bad luck Julian. Better luck next time, it was very close anyway, give it a while and who knows... WP:400? Lol. :) Athe Weatherman 14:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks everybody. Your comments mean a lot to me. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I want you to know I think you're a great admin even though I voted against you as b'crat, and yes, I think you will pass easily given some time. The disputed close of Dave's RFA gave you more scrutiny than otherwise you would have gotten if a b'crat had not done something so controversial during your run. Justified or not, it did make an effect. But don't think for a moment you aren't well-respected here. I fully expect you'll be a b'crat at this time next year. Auntie E (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I'll pile on as well. I opposed, but really only because I'm a 'crat on 2 other wikis, and have learned the hard way that 'crats arguing positions during a !vote causes a lot more problems than you might expect :-). It's plainly obvious that your heart is in just the right place though, and you've been quite graceful in "defeat". --SB_Johnny | ^talk 16:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:Rollback

Hello Juliancolton. Thank you so much for granting me rollback status. See you on Simple WP as well.--TVB dx iang (Ta lk) 15:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I saw you gave out a cookie!

Sinneed has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

And that reminded me to share a couple out as well. Thanks for pulling the content back for the deleted article.- sinneed (talk) 18:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Maturity

I assure you, you are, without doubt, the most mature, reserved, and demeanor-ed person I have known in a while. To have not passed your RfA - because of some of the most simple opposes ever - is ridiculous. Please, try to take to heart only the well-thought out opposes and fix them. I am trying to stay away from the contentious and, sometimes, depressing AfDs and leaning towards image work, as I, to be honest, prefer images over writing sometimes. FAR looks to be a lot less stressful than FAC, too. You are not immature, by any definition of the word, however outrageous. And yes, maybe a admin coaching program coud be helpful.

Best, ceranthor 20:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you; I appreciate the kind words. I note that while there were indeed some questionable opposes, many of the participants raised excellent points, so I don't feel like I've been defeated.

On another note, if you want to go ahead with admin coaching, go ahead and create User:Ceranthor/Admin_coaching, including a brief paragraph about yourself and your editing career. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll get working on it, could you look over the "ProstituteofEvil" report at UAA? ceranthor 20:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southwest Airlines Flight 2294

I removed the above AfD from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Virginia page, as the event happened in West Virginia, not Virginia. Don't worry, it happens all of the time. Folks from WV are always hearing about random relatives from Roanoke. :) Cheers. youngamerican (wtf?) 00:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks for fixing that. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at User:Dylan620/School.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 00:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Civony/Evony notability

Hi, hopefully this is going in the right place. Although I'd love to have Civony/Evony wiped off the face of the net entirely, and you've deleted it in the wiki, I see it has started to show up under 'notable' sources such as here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2009/jul/15/games-evony-spam-internet

I feel icky for even thinking the darn thing could be becoming 'notable' enough for the wiki. I don't need a response to this - just putting it out there for consideration. Cheers. Scribblette (talk) 02:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Request

I've asked an admin already and she has yet to reply back, so I thought to ask you since time is coming due. I believe you protected the TNA X Division Championship once before. Well tonight a new champion will be crowned and this will cause a problem with the review. It will be overun by ips who change anything and everything they do not understand nor agree with when they edit. Once this happens the stability of the article may be compromised and I do not want to have to withdraw it from another FAC. So could you please semi-protect the article until tomorrow to avoid problems?--WillC 16:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

To give the TPS-reply: No, it can't. WP:SEMI forbids protecting preemptively before any disruption has occurred. Regards So Why 17:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I put it on my watch list and, as I stated in response to the query at WP:RFPP, file a request the moment you notice an increase in vandalism. Thanks. Plastikspork (talk) 17:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I guess that will do for now. Juding from the activity that the TNA Women's Knockout Championship received last week, I was wondering.--WillC 18:15, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Request

Hey Julian, can you move ECW (World Wrestling Entertainment) to ECW (WWE), the acronym version is preferred over the spelled out version, example: World Tag Team Championship (WWE) and World Heavyweight Championship (WWE). ECW is the name of a WWE television program and its the international name, but unlike WWE Raw and WWE SmackDown, its not called WWE ECW, so it needs to be moved to ECW (WWE). Speaking of SmackDown, the WWE Friday Night SmackDown article needs to be moved to WWE SmackDown. It was agreed upon at WT:TV and WT:PW that the articles should have their international name and not the U.S-based names. Thanks.--Tru co ₅₀₃ 18:04, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for moving the ECW one, may you also move the WWE Friday Night SmackDown -> WWE SmackDown.--Tru co ₅₀₃ 18:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Also

Done. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:24, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks so much. --Tru co ₅₀₃ 18:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Another pic for the portal?

Julian,

I know you've got to like this one. Daniel Case (talk) 18:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you get my reply?

Hey Julian. I noticed that you still haven't replied to my post at User:Dylan620/School#XfD. I am beginning to get worried. If you did not intend on replying, then please accept my apology. Best, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 21:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Commons Protection Request

Can you protect this image on Commons since in a few hours it will be the main page and as you know the uploading of images is currently disabled. Thanks!--Giants27 (c|s) 01:14, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!--Giants27 (c|s) 01:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup participates in the Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout

Hello all, iMatthew here. I just wanted to let you know about "The Great Wikipedia Dramaout" which starts this Saturday. The goal of the Dramaout is to spend five days working on improving articles and abstaining from any of Wikipedia's drama. I don't think that any of you will have a problem focusing on articles for five days, because of course, any work you get done during the Dramaout will count towards your score in the WikiCup. Details are on the page; hope to see you all signing up! :) iMatthew ^talk at 00:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

G'day Julian

I thought I'd drop a note in here to let you know that I've suggested to Georgewilliam that you might be a good candidate to assess the thread about Giano's block and decide whether or not to unblock, or how best to progress. I'm hoping that's an agreeable path to all parties, and I'm hoping that you'll review, and make a note of your decision at the noticeboard :-) Hope the water's not too hot! best, Privatemusings (talk) 03:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey PM. I'd be happy to evaluate the situation and provide my thoughts at ANI, but I'd rather not be in a position to decide the fate of the block. In any event, I'll wait to see what GWH has to say. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

well keep your own counsel, obviously, and thanks for casting a glance anywhoo :-) Privatemusings (talk) 03:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with JC. Best to let it go at this point. Unfortunate that the blocking admin is "sticking to his guns" so to speak. Civility is as civility does. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Nash

Hi, You've deleted the wrong article. The character at AfD *was* at Tom Nash when I nominated it but was moved to Tom Nash (Home & Away character) during the process (not be me;). Tom Nash was made into a disambig page. The other needs deleting. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Nash

Whacking with a wet trout or trouting is a common practice on Wikipedia when experienced editors slip up and make a silly mistake. It, along with sentencing to the village stocks, is used to resolve one-off instances of seemingly silly behavior amongst normally constructive community members, as opposed to long term patterns of disruptive edits, which earns warnings and blocks.

Example

Whack!

The above is a WikiTrout (Oncorhynchus macrowikipediensis), used to make subtle adjustments to the clue levels of experienced Wikipedians.

To whack a user with a wet trout, simply place {{trout}} on their talk page.

Hi, I have restored Tom Nash, which was turned into a semi-legitimate disambiguation page during the debate, and deleted the article the debate was actually about- Tom Nash (Home & Away character). My first trouting, so feel free to return fire if I've made a hash-up. J Milburn (talk) 13:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, oops. :) Thanks for cleaning up after me. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:File:William S Taylor.jpg

It would apparently seem so - I've made the appropriate change. Cheers, FASTILY ^(TALK) 17:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anton incident

Re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anton incident - I think it's a shame you closed as Keep rather than relisting - the main nomination argument (WP:NOTNEWS) was simply not addressed. Rd232 ^talk 18:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

The discussion was too long to justify relisting, as it seemed to me that consensus was clear. And indeed, several of the participants did explain why the topic is notable. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation question

Hi again. Jean Hugo is a disambiguation page, but it only has two articles linked from it. Would it be appropriate to PROD it on the grounds that there are only two outgoing links from it? Dabomb87 (talk) 18:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that would be fine. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:NODRAMA reminder

Thanks for signing up for the Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Wikipedia stands to benefit from the improvements in the article space as a result of this campaign. This is a double reminder. First, the campaign begins on July 18, 2009 at 00:00 (UTC). Second, please remember to log any articles you have worked on during the campaign at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/Log. Thanks again for your participation! --Jayron32.talk.say no to drama 21:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Ruby Buckton

Hello! A wikiproject was in the process of handling that content when the flood of AfDs occurred. Anyway, as most in the discussion did not seem opposed to a merge and as your close seemed okay with a redirect, could you kindly undelete the edit history and redirect to List_of_Home_and_Away_characters#B? As you can see at Talk:List_of_Home_and_Away_characters#Notable_characters_that_warrant_independent_articles this was one of the ones we were working on improving for the purpose of merging and such and we could really use the edit history for those purposes, while being okay with not overturning the redirect. Thanks! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 21:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure;

Done. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 21:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Move request

List of American Civil War Medal of Honor recipients: A-F → List of American Civil War Medal of Honor recipients: A–F. Should be uncontroversial (WP:DASH). Dabomb87 (talk) 21:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Armenia, first state to adopt Christianity

User Brutaldeluxe, apparently believes that the listed references are WP:OR or WP:UNDUE and are not enough evidence to prove Armenia was the first state to adopt Christianity. I'd rather you intervene than having this devolve into an edit war. Here are the list of a few of the references I provided[5]. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

The real Stuart Miles.

Hi JC, This user is still claiming to be the real Stuart Miles and changes his birthday. You left a message, User_talk:Stuartmiles what became of that and could we try to work this out, is he the real Miles or does he need to get a new Username? Regards. (Off2riorob (talk) 12:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC))

Thanks, lets see if he is really the real...S Miles. (Off2riorob (talk) 21:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC))

WikiCup Newsletter XXV

Delivered by JCbot (talk) 16:44, 18 July 2009 (UTC).

The bot didn't substitute the newsletters. I've substituted the ones today, but please fix it for later. Shubinator (talk) 17:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Jim Braden

Thanks for bringing this to the group's attention. I believe it is being unfairly targeted. Aliveatoms (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Admin

I have and in fact was nominated for it some time ago. In the end I decided to turn down the nomination. I simply don't have the time or interest in being an admin. Thanks for the suggestion and I am flattered, but still not interested. Dincher (talk) 21:34, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

My edit to Phil Defranco was and is correct. Why is there a need to have a page on him? It reads as a biography of an unimportant person. If this is the case then anyone can have a Wiki page.

Defranco edit

My edit to Phil Defranco was and is correct. Why is there a need to have a page on him? It reads as a biography of an unimportant person. If this is the case then anyone can have a Wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.65.83 (talk) 22:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

IP Block Exemption

Recently I tried to e-mail en-l@lists.wikimedia.org. The problem is is that I got a response which read that the e-mail doesn't exist. Could you please help me with that strange thing? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

thanks

I know this is getting rather redundant, but .. "Thank You" again .. ;) — Ched : ? 03:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 11:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Samples of simulation typefaces

Please undelete this article. Discussion was in favor of keeping it. ⇔ ChristTrekker 06:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Done; in the future, you may contest PRODs by simply removing the tag. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 11:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Another roadscape for the portal

Julian,

How about this one, too? Daniel Case (talk) 16:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Jeong Yim

Hello Juliancolton, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Jeong Yim has been removed. It was removed by Huo Xin with the following edit summary '(Removed dated prod and prod2. This page will be updated soon and will have reference sources.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Huo Xin before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 17:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Deletion of CompuTalk

I'm writing to protest the deletion of the CompuTalk article. The grounds cited were that it failed notability and was advertising the show's host and the show.

Notability - The show was a nationally syndicated talk radio program that had a head-to-head rivalry with Kim Kommando. It was cited and referenced numerous times online, and many of these sources were cited in the article. This was a part of radio history, and was an active part of several historically notable events. Finally, if other similar shows are notable (such as the Kim Kommando show), then so, too, is this one.

Advertising - The show has been off the air since 2000. This never was an advertisement for the show. And since I personally removed the segment regarding the host (the only portion that might be considered advertising at the time), there was nothing to advertise him, either.

These two claims simply do not hold up against scrutiny, and I'm requesting that the article be replaced. There are far less notable and far more commercial articles on Wikipedia than this one. J. Kevin Tumlinson (talk) 22:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I can't seem to find an article by "CompuTalk". Could you please provide a link? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I think he's talking about Computalk which you deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computalk. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review the essay Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. User:MiszaBot III (talk) 20:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

«l| Promethean ™|l» (talk) 01:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although we invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, at least one of your recent edits was not in accordance with the wishes of the Cabal, and as soon as we figure out how to do so, it will be reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, or harsh realities of Wikipedia bias you'd like to expose, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I would welcome you to Wikipedia, but you have already barged your way in here uninvited. Furthermore, you have engaged in TROLLING and THOUGHTCRIMES as determined by the Cabal! Please stop now or I will cry to Jimbo and Lie to Arbcom in hopes of getting you banned like everyone else does. «l| Promethean ™|l» (talk) 01:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Please do not add hoaxes to Wikipedia. Hoaxes are caught and marked for deletion shortly after they are created. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method is to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia – and then to correct them if possible. Please don't disrupt Wikipedia in an attempt to test our ability to detect and remove such material. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia policy to learn more about this project and how you can make a positive impact. Thank you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Darren23 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Darren 23 (Contribs) 19:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Evaluation of the Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics

Hi Juliancolton! I have been made some changes in the article Evaluation of the Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics since its FLC. I am waiting your opinion... Thank you for your participation; Felipe Menegaz 20:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Finally done

Hi Julian. I've (finally) finished this review. I've asked for your comment directly in one place, but I'd like to hear what you have to say in general. Do you think I've found the right level of harshness about sources for a GA? I'm also aware that this took a fairly long time - do you think that's problematic? I wonder if I should only embark on reviews when I have a serious chunk of free time in future; but then again, they seem to sit on the nominations page for weeks with no input at all so perhaps it's ok? Olaf Davis (talk) 20:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Deletion of 'Daily-Update Publishers' page

Hi Julian

I've just noticed that the 'Daily-Update Publishers' page was deleted. I'm not sure why this happened, but it was a PROD and I hope that you will restore it, please.

Thanks

Cameron Russell Daily-Update Publishers

du@dupublishers.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.69.5.179 (talk) 06:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Julian

I've just read why 'Daily-Update Publishers' was deleted - conflict of interest. I'd like the opportunity to amend the text so that it is indeed neutral. I would imagine that nearly every publisher has contributed to their own page. Indeed, it is important that there is comprehensive information on publishing pages and the publisher is really the only party able to do this. However, I recognize that the text was not neutral and that my own interest was not declared. This was unintentional and I would like to fix that up. May I also be unblocked as an editor. I will contribute to other pages on Wikipedia.

Thanks again

Cameron —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.69.5.179 (talk) 06:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Karunakara Guru

You had closed this AfD as keep, but the talk page box that you added links to the first AfD nomination (three years ago, delete) and not this one. I've never closed a 2nd nom before, so, don't know the fix for this, can you take a look and link the correct AfD? Don't want someone linking that for a G4! -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 01:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Perfect, thx -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 16:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheaper By the Dozen 3

The Cheaper By The Dozen 3 movie should have it's own article because it is a future movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Libertyhawkline (talk • contribs) 01:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

OP is referring to Cheaper by the Dozen 3 which you deleted via PROD a few days ago. IMO, the movie is unlikely to ever be made and certainly doesn't meet notability requirements. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see, thanks. I'll restore it and send it to AfD. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the clean-up on my user page. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 13:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Script

Hi, I noticed that you are using my script, and I thought I would let you know that I have split the script into two, namely User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js and User:Plastikspork/date.js. If you would like to use both, you can just add importScript('User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js'); and importScript('User:Plastikspork/date.js'); to your monobook.js. Alternatively, if you are only using the date formatting buttons, you can just add the date.js script. Let me know if you have any questions, comments, bug reports, suggestions, requests, or really anything. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 21:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

1996 AHS timeline

Normally I wouldn't be engaging in talk page chatter during the Dramaout (which ends in two hours anyway), but I'll make an exception here since this is related to article building. I was hoping you could give a thorough review of my article at User:Dylan620/Sandbox/Timeline of the 1996 Atlantic hurricane season (and add a timeline map, such as the one here). I just finished the "list" part, and reviewed units, added pictures, and performed mind-numbing cleanup using WP:ADVISOR. All the best, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 21:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Done with both of the issues you raised. While I clearly didn't do a perfect job with the "dissipation and formation" issue (nor was I able to), I did the best I could. :) May I publish the article? I was hoping to ship it off to T:TDYK by the end of my night. Best, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 01:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm saving FLC until tomorrow afternoon, when I'll have time to respond to the comments without getting swamped and freaking out like I did last time I submitted a list to FLC. Besides, I said that I would submit it to DYK tonight. :P Now that the page is in the mainspace, could you please rate it? Thank you! --Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 01:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for making WP:NODRAMA a success!

Thank you again for your support of the Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Preliminary states indicate that 129 new articles were created, 203 other articles were improved, and 183 images were uploaded. Additionally, 41 articles were nominated for DYK, of which at least 2 have already been promoted. There are currently also 8 articles up for GA status and 3 up for FA/FL status. Though the campaign is technically over, please continue to update the log page at WP:NODRAMA/L with any articles which you worked during the campaign, and also to note any that receive commendation, such as DYK, GA or FA status. You may find the following links helpful in nominating your work:

T:TDYK for Did You Know nominations
WP:GAC for Good Article nominations
WP:FAC for Featured Article nominations
WP:FLC for Featured List nominations
WP:FPC for Featured Picture nominations

Again, thank you for making this event a success! --Jayron32.talk.say no to drama 02:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		You too (for AfD work) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

your request

I'll look in a few days, after the NYC meetup this weekend. DGG (talk) 04:39, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Your assistance would be appreciated

Hi there Julian. I know you are an admin at Commons, so could you please take a look at this request at my talk page and give your opinion? Regards So Why 12:12, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

question

I've been working on understanding AFd tagging and what not to tag and would like to know if articles such as Speed Limits in Mississippi are within a vcatergory. I looked and couldn't find anything and thought you might help see if there is a relevant policy or precedent to articles like this.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Israel lobby in the United States

Thank you for handling this issue. You should be aware when you read the article that it is not the same article that was originally nominated for deletion. The version that much of the discussion relates to was about 4,500 words; this one is less than 1,000. It has been, essentially, eviscerated and the topic changed by another editor, in an attempt to ensure its deletion.

You can read the article that was the subject of most of the discussion here.

Thanks again, --Ravpapa (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll take that into consideration. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:21, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Providing detailed close rationales, such as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Israel lobby in the United States, will stand you in good stead come your next RfB. Well done. -- Avi (talk) 16:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Seconded. - Pointillist (talk) 17:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thirded. --Ravpapa (talk) 17:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks guys. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:08, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Tropical Storm Hallie (1975)

On July 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tropical Storm Hallie (1975), 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.

Royal broil 00:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Sigma Alpha Epsilon

I am new to Wiki, and started editing over the last 12 months, however I need help considering a semi protect on the page for Sigma Alpha Epsilon. Could you review my request: Multiple edits from anonymous users reverting newly added content. IlliniGradResearch (talk) 03:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Nannochloropsis

Hello Juliancolton, Please undo the deletion of Nannochloropsis, which was deleted as one of the bot-created algae articles. I had corrected it and want to expand it now. Thanks Inks002 (talk) 13:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing,

Done. Sorry for the inconvenience. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you. You really are everywhere, aren't you? ;-) wadester 16 18:00, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Umm .. ahh ... yea

Aw geesh ... I'm off a couple days and I miss all the fun. Ah well, I just read through the ANI, and AfD. (as well as that ridiculous block suggestion). Anyway - get me up to speed, and I'll help if I can. Are we working off the User:Juliancolton/List list?, and deleting manually? Is MZM writing a bot to do this? (bot that deletes? .. mmmm... thinking on that one) Is someone working through one of the "del batch" buttons? Should we be moving the deleted ones from the list to the "list/del"? Is it all taken care of now? ... if not - What can I do to help? — Ched : ? 18:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC) (cross posted from Lara talk)

Heh, welcome back. Yeah, we're just deleting everything on that list that hasn't been expanded since creation. Since each one has to be checked manually, bots and scripts are useless here, which is why it's taking longer than usual. Any help is appreciated! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

Ireland – Turkey relations → Ireland–Turkey relations (the dash spacing is wrong per WP:DASH). Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

simple wikipedia

I need you to block user talk editing access for Coco Mojo at simple. He changed the warnings to mean the opposite of what they said. I have given him a warning but I doubt he will listen. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Already done, but you could have pinged me at my simplewiki talk page. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize you still had a window/tab open to simpleWP. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Request to ban BOT Brigade 68.4.78.25ö

Hi, I want to ban BOT Brigade 68.4.78.25ö. It's because he WAS Supposed to be my bot, but BAG rejected it. I can't find a use for it nore do I want to use it in the future. So can you tell me how to ban it or at least you ban him? Regards, Secret Saturdays (talk) 01:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC) P.S. I'm sorry to hear that you didn't get promoted to bureaucrat. :_-(

Done. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

NOTLD:R removal

Hello Juliancolton. On 23 July 2009, 00:18, you deleted the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Living_Dead_Reanimated) concerning Night of the Living Dead: Reanimated (NOTLD:R). This animated remake of the classic horror film by George A. Romero has been in production for over a year now. I am one of the many contributing artists (from around the globe we're upwards of hundreds.) If you please, may I inquire as to the decision to remove the NOTLDR wiki? The film is being released on DVD this Winter (2009) and I would appreciate the opportunity to re-establish said wiki. Thank you very much for your time. Creativeintentions (talk) 05:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The deletion discussion has some information. While I wasn't involved in this at all, I would have deleted it too if I'd gotten there first. Frank | talk 05:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

forgot to sign my name and put date

Please if you can, send me a copy of my article that was deleted. My user name is Madeleinediaz, my email is mad_copy@yahoo.com, and the date is July 25,2009. Thank you, Madeleine DiazMadeleinediaz (talk) 08:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Mass deletion

If you deleted those articles without checking to see if someone else worked on them first -- or restored them -- then my comments do apply to you. I take no responsibility for how a shoe might fit. Further, I do not like arbitrarily using my Admin powers as I did, but the circumstances left me no choice: whenever possible, we should make the effort to keep useful content. -- llywrch (talk) 19:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I've been reviewing each article to an extent, to see if they've been expanded beyond one or two sentences, per the AfD discussion. It would likely take days to check the edit history of every single page, though. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Consensus was for them to be mass deleted. If you use your ops against consensus in the situation, you are giving suitable grounds for a desysopping. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I just saw from your log that you restored something that you, yourself was working on. This directly violates CoI. I would recommend this case to be taken directly to ArbCom for an immediate desysop. Such abuses are completely unacceptable. A statement has been made about the egregious violation here Ottava Rima (talk) 19:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Simmer down, Ottava. The articles will be deleted again before the end of the run if they've not been adequately expanded. Julian, myself and others are enforcing a clear consensus from the AFD. There seems to be a misunderstanding about what wheelwarring is as well (see my talk page), but going to ARbCom would be silly. Lara 19:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't care if the pages are kept or not. What I care about is someone abusing their ops, restoring material that they created, then harassing someone else for enforcing community consensus. This is unacceptable behavior for any admin. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, but ArbCom is still an overreaction. Lara 19:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't like it when an admin directly violates the CoI and then proceeds to taunt in the above manner the person they just overrode while abusing their powers. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

If you are interested I have made a script that batch deletes a list of pages you give it. It's not really a bot since it doesn't act on its own. Triplestop x3 19:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Julian - I've been marking things to check, or if I saw that it was expanded - on your "list" page. Hope that's ok. Couple didn't really seem like "expand" - more like fixes to "listas" type of stuff - but I left it undeleted anyway - and just marked with "(check)" I'm working in 200-300 area. If you'd rather I didn't post to the page, let me know. — Ched : ? 20:25, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that's great, thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

WOW ... what a day huh? anyway, I copied your list - then tried to sort through what has been worked on and such. I broke everything down into groups of about 100, and kept at it for a bit. I put the articles that folks seem to be working on at the top. Looks like we're down to under 500 or so, so hopefully the "emergency" has been handled. I'm gonna try to keep track of what articles we've been able to get folks to salvage out of this - maybe mention it to the poor guy who took such a beating over it all. I really felt bad for him, only trying to add content to the project, and a couple folks said a couple unkind things and all. Well, hopefully the worst of the little storm is over now - I hate seeing folks get after each other over things. I put in a little over 4 hrs. on it, maybe deleted 100+ or so. The page I was working off of was User:Ched Davis/Julian-list. Thanks Julian, I really appreciate all the work you put into getting the list together, and helping get everything back to normal. U good peeps .. ya know dat? ;-) — Ched : ? 23:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks so much for the help. I'll try to sort through the remaining pages later tonight. Keep up the good work. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

See User:Frank/Julian-list1, User:Frank/Julian-list2, and User:Frank/Julian-list3 for templated listings. The ones that have parentheses in them are not templated. Makes it easier to check history with a single click. Couldn't fit on one page; too many template calls. Frank | talk 03:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

That will certainly come in useful, thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I just deleted the last of them (those actually expanded excepted). They were all deleted without prejudice, so if people want to recreate them with references and information, then they surely can. Lara 15:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Apparently there are a still some that nobody has looked at yet. Besides the ones mentioned on your talk page, Lara, I've just stumbled across Claire Marienfeld which was also created via AWB by Albert, but was not on the list. Julian, I'm guessing that one was outside the date range you checked when compiling the list? Amalthea 15:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears that's the case, unfortunately. I'll run another check in a bit. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Request on deletion

I thought to ask a non-affiliated WP:PW admin to delete a few templates which are no longer used. There was a small discussion on the matter at WT:PW#PPV templates. So if you don't mind could you delete the ones in question? Hit me back with your answer and I will give you a list of them.--WillC 07:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

See WP:CSD#T3. If they meet that criteria, go ahead and tag them and I'll be able to delete them in seven days. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Any idea how I would get the text to wrap around the template? It's a useful diagram, but this set back is annoying. wadester 16 07:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You would want to use a table and use "align" to allow it to wrap around, ala this. However, there are some artifacts that can be seen on my end... any idea what causes that? -- RattleMan 07:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Yea, I'm seeing the same thing. wadester 16 15:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, looks fine to me now. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm still seeing the shadows. wadester 16 21:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

can you send me the article you deleted by Madeleinediaz?

please, i can't find it in the deletion and it took me two hours or more to put together. I don't have a backup of it. My email is mad_copy@yahoo.com. I don't intend to post it again. Had no idea it was infringing.Madeleinediaz (talk) 08:07, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Possibly she means her userpage, which you deleted? Javert ^{I knit sweaters, yo!} 16:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

would you try something else please, to find my article?

Try MobileSyncBrowser, please. Perhaps the name change I requested is what's throwing off the search. I was relly upset to find my article deleted; I would've removed it if somebody had asked. Now it seems I lost all the time I spent writing it. Which is why I'm asking, would you look again? Sorry to bother you again.18:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madeleinediaz (talk • contribs)

Okay

Thanks for responding. Is there a way to retrieve it?Madeleinediaz (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

yes

I would just remove it. Promise. :-)Madeleinediaz (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)18:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I erased it for WP, but was able to copy it and now I have it my files; not everything is lost! So thank you.Madeleinediaz (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Integrity

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		I've long been a distant admirer of both your work and your temperament, Julian, so I can't say that I was actually "shocked" by this co-nomination after his !vote at your RfB. Still, I felt that your good grace—both at the RfB, and in nominating him—warranted at least a note of admiration, given how few people would do the same. I've never voted at an RfB before, but I'll be sure to keep an eye out for your next bid, which I hope will meet with better luck. You clearly have the integrity for the position. Un school 20:23, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. :) I admire and respect those who voice their honest opinion, so I don't bear grudges against any of the opposers at my RfB. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Not bearing grudges is one thing. What you did went a step beyond—hence, the BStar. Cheers. Un school 21:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Better late than never

Sorry I took so long to respond, lots of personal stuff going on right now. Maybe, I would like to have rollback, but isn't it kinda messy to get and use? Southern IllinoisSKYWARN^{Got something to say?} 23:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I can grant you the right in about two seconds. :) It's a pretty useful tool, but it's easy to misclick and accidentally revert someone's legitimate edit. Overall though I'd say it's definitely worth it. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I have a tendency to do stupid things like that, so maybe not. Southern IllinoisSKYWARN^{Got something to say?} 01:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I mean, any mistakes are easily corrected. It's your call, but it can't hurt to try it out. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I might have to try it out, but not right now, like I said, lot of stuff going on right now, so maybe early next week. Southern IllinoisSKYWARN^{Got something to say?} 02:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, that works. Hope everything in real life works out for you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Will Wagstaff

I'm very familiar with the CSD criteria, as I have tagged hundreds of articles for speedy deletion on new-page patrol over the years, and I still believe that this article merits a speedy as the assertions of notability were very thin and anecdotal at best. But I'll gladly settle for an AfD, and thank you for staring it. I think I've only seen one other admin who declined my speedy tag that had the courtesy to start an AfD for the article, so hats off to you! - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:31, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, statements like "is a leading ornithologist and naturalist" make me a bit uncomfortable deleting per A7. When it comes to the more borderline cases, I figure it can't hurt to have a few extra eyes looking. Also, sorry if that message on your talk page comes across as a bit condescending; I use a script that automatically delivers the template. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Nodrama Barnstar

		The Anti-Drama Barnstar
		Thank you for participating in The Great Wikipedia Dramaout 2009, avoiding drama for a full 5 days!--^{The Legendary}_{Sky Attacker} 04:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

bureaucrat

I thought you were a bureaucrat at the English Wikipedia with a vote of 26 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. TechOutsider ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. :) The only nomination I can think of with that tally (or close to it) is Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/UninvitedCompany. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Remonstrate

I must say I'm disappointed with and don't understand your decision to keep Kelricson Garlin Valdoria Skolia and the other two of its ilk, given the utter lack of sourcing. Abductive (talk) 05:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to explain a bit better. At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelricson Garlin Valdoria Skolia, there was a general consensus that the article should not exist on its own. Several editors agreed that the content should be merged into a relevant character list; however, such a page does not exist. As the closing admin, my job isn't to find a suitable merge target; that's an editorial decision, and is outside the scope of AfD. Indeed, discussions that result in decisions to merge/redirect usually default to keep, and are non-binding. In other words, there was no consensus for deletion at that AfD, and given the lack of a strong consensus either way, I closed that AfD as no consensus to allow for discussion to continue on the article's talk page, hopefully generating a solid agreement. Failing that, the article can be re-nominated. Hope this helps clear things up. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I see. If the character list is ever made, I think will be neccessary to move the article before merging, since the character's name is simply "Kelricson Garlin Valdoria". Abductive (talk) 06:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

BLP problems

I would be willing to scan that list and seperate the BLP problematic ones from the deceased. I dont know if you are aware but half of the politicians in that list are not living biographies and the BLP tags shouldn't have been applied to those. I think we should delete the ones which immedaitely could cause a seirous problem and at least try to build up some of the deceased politician stubs even if it takes some time. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 12:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Cool, any help is appreciated. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The idea of course was that all of those article could be translated like I've just done with Albert Buchmann and sources found. I'm sure you'll agree that those deleted are nostly all notable people and deserve good encyclopedia entires but that the scale of the task was too large given the concerns. It would be better to start them gradually with details like this I think I just wish there was a way to maximise quality and quantity of missing articles without either affecting each other. I have long wanted a more larger scale transiwki project running on here. If there wer emore editors interested I'd make a proposal at councils. I think that potentially we could beneift massively from referenced content transferred from other wikis and wouldlike to see a way to draw up banks of missing articles at least and trying to produce something of a higher quality than sub stubs. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't I actually get a say Julian given that I am working fast through these articles? Why is it you never feel able to actually discuss things with me? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course you do. I think we've given everybody a fair chance to work on the articles, but if not, please let me know. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Not really. I only became aware that the transwiki tags and references were not valid as a start just yesterday. I have begun working hard through them today. I think I deserve a week minimum to actively work on them. You know what I have been capable of the past in terms of workloads so I think you should give me a reasonable amount of time to do what I can to resurrect the problem. The fact that I've managed to sort out 50 articles in 2 hours means that I should be able to sift through the bunch you are proposing within a few days. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

In that case, I'll certainly let the remaining articles sit for awhile. Would you like me to restore some of the deleted articles into your userspace, as well? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:21, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be best trust me. You have my word that I'll do the very best I can within the next week. I am making really good progress already. I think I have a fair few number to handle at the moment. Don't worry we have lists of politicians in the article space so we know exactly what ones were deleted yesterday. Given time they can be recreated at least with proper references and birth and death dates. But right now I will try my hardets to sort out what I created and ensure each has a proper reference and a sentence or two. Ideally I'd like to translate each one fully but right now I'll have to keep it to bare minimum. I'm off for tea now and I'll continue in 20-30 minutes. I'm sure you understand that I am already under pressure with these and another AFD and people gunning down at me with delete when I'm in the middle of trying to fix them asap I think would not help. You should know me well enough that I will sort out the problem to the best I can. If I give up within a week, then you can delete the remaining ones if needs be. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Take as much time as you need, and let me know if you need any help. I trust that you'll do a good job. Good luck, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou, I genuinely appreciate you giving me a chance to fix them. They'll still be stubs, but they will be valid stubs, which is the difference from before I guess. At least then they'll be there to be expanded upon and not be a major problem. Any help is appreciated by anybody of course but I created the problem so I'll do my best to fix it. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC) Sorry that your bureacrat nomination didn't succeed, but you had a whopping level of support. How old actually are you? I too for granted you were older, like older than me (26) and in your mid to late 20s at least. Wow, you seem , well, unusually mature if you are a teenager. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 18:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm between 14 and 18, but I generally prefer not to disclose my exact age. I too was quite surprised at the number of supports I received, so it wasn't entirely a failure in my opinion. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:34, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for "butting in", but you're between 14 and 18? Damn, I feel old now. :-( --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Me too! Well in any normal "poll" your 226 supports compared to 67 opposes is a substantial majority. Unfortunate there is a threshold for opposing otherwise you'd have made it easily. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 12:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXVI

Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 15:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Rename

Hey, Julian. I've made a rename request at WP:USURP#Dylan620 → The Pretender, but I have two trains of thought on this. On one hand, I love the username, and I've finally gotten the courage to request the rename after considering it on-and-off for several months now. On the other hand, I've become so well-known as Dylan620, and I'm afraid that if I change my name, people won't know who I once was. What do you think? --Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 20:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, in the end it's your call, but unless you have a reason for it (security, etc.), it's generally better to keep your current username in my opinion. "Dylan620" is what you've established yourself as, but again, that's just me. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

If you do decide to change your name, just include something like ^{(formerly Dylan620)} in your signature for several weeks and that may solve the problem. :-) JamieS93 20:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I share Julian's opinion in that I generally don't think name changes are worthwhile just for aesthetic reasons. I quite regularly find out someone that I thought was a newer user was actually someone I know that changed their name without my knowledge - it's very hard to make it as clear as you'd like that you're the same person. I agree with Jamie's suggestion at adding a note in your signature if you do go ahead with it, and I'd also suggest you maintain the colour and format of your signature. ~ mazca ^talk 21:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

RfA neutral-ing

Thanks for catching my weird slip-up. :p One two three... 22:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, no problem. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Small request

Hello, I recently authored the article for Alternative Stable States named Alternative Stable State. However, this article would be more appropriately named Alternative Stable States (plural). Could you please help me change the title of this article? I am very new to editing Wikipedia articles and am not sure how to do this. Thank you very much.

See Help:Moving a page. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Crate a project

Can you please tell me hopw can I create a WikiProject? Please rspond on my talkpage.Secret Saturdays (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2009 (UTC) PS, thanks for getting rid of my semi-bot.

Hmm, well, to start off, go ahead and propose the project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hi,

What I thought I tagged was South Caroilna Highway 38 which redirects to South Carolina Highway 38. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

"Take action" AFD

Hi, Julian, You closed this as a no consensus close. But only one person spoke against deletion. WP:WHATISCONSENSUS tells us that one dissenter does not thwart consensus, and WP:NOTUNANIMITY tells us that "after people have had a chance to state their viewpoint" - as they assuredly have after an AFD has been relisted - "it may become necessary to ignore someone or afford them less weight in order to move forward with what the group feels is best." Here, the group has spoken. The nominator and myself did so expressly, but the community has also, constructively, expressed itself: AFDs have a limited run because after the community has had reasonable notice, their silence can fairly be construed as assent, or at least indifference, to the article's deletion. Accordingly, I think there was consensus for that article's deletion and it should now be deleted.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 02:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

True, but the discussion was listed for three weeks, and no strong consensus developed either way; it would have been impractical to relist a third time, so a "no consensus" closure was really the only choice in my opinion. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

That assumes that consensus consists only in what is said explicitly. As I said above, though, I think that the community also speaks constructively by not speaking in opposition. I only contribute to AFDs on which I have a strong opinion one way or another; those that I don't comment on can have my support for deletion counted tacitly. Those who oppose the article's deletion had a chance to make their argument, and no one did. The silence of everyone else can and should be treated as support or indifference (that's a necessary upshot of the process not being a vote - if people must speak up to weigh in, then the process is a vote). A consensus to delete closure was an available option, and it would have been better had that been exercised.

I take it that this is water over the dam, however, and the decision won't be reversed. If that is so (and obviously I would rather the article simply be deleted), consistent with what I've said above, do you have any objections if I simply PROD the article? If I'm right, and the community is indifferent, things will progress. If they don't, relisting at AFD becomes appropriate.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 03:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD is a community discussion, so WP:SILENCE doesn't apply. Failing the explicit formation of consensus to delete, discussions default to "keep". That said, I've no objection to speedily renominating the article in question. However, as it has been previously nominated for AfD, it cannot be tagged for PROD. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Username Vios

You know that policy was changed awhile back that made it easier to block a company username? I'm not sure if you saw it, but it no longer has to be blatant. Explicitly using a name or URL of a company, group or product as your username may be considered a form of promotion. It was designed so we didn't send so many people over to COI. I know you know policy well, but this change almost slipped by me. Law_{type! snype?} 04:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, didn't see that the new version of the username policy was implemented. Thanks for the heads-up. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it wasn't entirely altruistic. I was tired of seeing you send people to COI and not handing out maximum blockage, haha. I usually softblock these guys so they can change their name and try again. I feel bad preventing COI users from ever doing anything else. Law_{type! snype?} 05:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheaper By the Dozen 3

The Cheaper By The Dozen 3 movie should have it's own article because it is a future movie.

Talkback

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

SEWP

Can you make sure that NonvocalScream's nonsensical rantings about me being an SPA needing punishment or banning at simple are not heeded? I know he knows I'm active here, and did not bother to leave me any sort of notification here (I doubt that was my fault for not putting something on the top of my user talk that says "I DON'T EDIT THIS WIKI OFTEN" until recently).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 10:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The discussion at the administrators' noticeboard over there was recently closed, so everything should be sorted out by now. I'll continue to keep an eye out, though. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject TRANSWIKI

Hi. In light of recent events and community concerns about the way in which content is transferred I have proposed a new wikiproject which would attempt to address any of the concerns and done in an environment where a major group of editors work together to transfer articles from other wikipedias in the most effective way possible without BLP or referencing problems. Please offer your thoughts at the proposal and whether or not you support or oppose the idea of a wikiproject dedicated to organizing a more efficient process of getting articles in different languages translated into English. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 12:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll give it a go. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Richard William Aguirre deletion

Julian, I am requesting that you reverse the deletion of the Richard William Aguirre article. I have been responding to the deletion warning to "discospinsters" talk page with my changes and they just notified me to respond to this page. Richard william aguirre is a registered Independent candidate for governor of California in 2010 and the founder of the Environmental group Save Sunset Cliffs in San Diego California. I had edited the article to reflect the issues of "Significant Coverage" with several television and internet commercial news stories, and added an article from a San Diego news paper article on Save Sunset Cliffs that Richard William Aguirre founded in 2002. These articles should establish the Richard William Aguirre article as being wikipedia worthy. Just because Richard William Aguirre does not have a long political history does not make his campaign any less wikipedia worthy than the life long politician. He is a very notable person in San Diego,California, and there is a daily growing press about his campaign, including National Television news coverage, San Diego Union Tribune news paper story, and Radio interviews on English and National Latino radio stations. This is my first article so please advise me of what else I need to do to reverse the deletion. Thank you Sdpolitics (Sdpolitics (talk) 08:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC))

Julian, This article on Richard William Aguirre meets all WP requirements for "notability". There are far more news stories and worthy articles about Richard William Aguirre, his campaign and his other endeavors than there are on several of the other candidates for governor of California in 2010. Like this article from todays "Diario San Diego" [6]. The Richard William Article is notable to all Californians, and even crosses the language and culture spectrum of the entire state. The deletion of this article was an injustice to WP and also to the people who use the site. That Richard William Aguirre is notable enough to have national articles written about him and his campaign, yet not notable for WP only discredits WP and your pursuit of true factual information. Please review this article and remove it from deletion. As you can see there will be many more source references coming in the immediate future, as both he and his campaign are now attracting news stories on a daily basis. Please advise on how to undo deletion if you don't have the authority to make this correction. To not undo this deletion would be an injustice to your site. Thank you, (Sdpolitics (talk) 18:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC))

This article was deleted in accordance with the deletion discussion. It is not a unilateral decision. The best thing to do is check WP:POLITICIAN. If Julian does not answer here (an unlikely scenario), you could try WP:DRV. Frank | talk 18:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Frank is correct. The deletion discussion determined that the subject is not sufficiently notable for inclusion. If you still believe this deletion was in error, please file a request at WP:DRV, as unfortunately I can't simply overrule consensus. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Or... WP:REFUND if the editor wanted to work on improving the article in his userspace to get it up to acceptable levels. — Ched : ? 07:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Summit School (Queens, New York)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Summit School (Queens, New York). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Deletion review for Richard William Aguirre

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Richard William Aguirre. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sdpolitics (talk) 20:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC) ==

Julian, I sent the Richard William Aguirre article to deletion review. Anything you could do in reviewing this page and giving it the justice it deserves would be appreciated. This article on Richard William Aguirre meets all WP requirements for "notability". There are far more news stories and worthy articles about Richard William Aguirre, his campaign and his other endeavors than there are on several of the other candidates or politicians, Like this article from todays "Diario San Diego" [1]. The Richard William Article is notable to all Californians, and even crosses the language and culture spectrum of the entire state. The deletion of this article was an injustice to WP and also to the people who use the site. That Richard William Aguirre is notable enough to have national articles written about him and his campaign, yet not notable for WP only discredits WP and your pursuit of true factual information. Please review this article and remove it from deletion. As you can see there will be many more source references coming in the immediate future, as both he and his campaign are now attracting news stories on a daily basis. Please advise on how to undo deletion if you don't have the authority to make this correction. To not undo this deletion would be an injustice to your site. Thank you. (Sdpolitics (talk) 20:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC))

More on politicians

I gather it is the BLPs you are most concerned about with the German politicians? Is it OK if I gradually go through the lists and ensure the BLPs are at least sourced as the task is pretty big and it will take a lot of time to expand and reference like all of them even the deceased ones. Is it OK if I go through them in my own time as it is difficult to spend hours doing that and nothing else. It may take a week or two but it should be sorted soon enough but it is hard to say yes that is all I will edit for the next week. I'll try my best to ensure I cover them all.. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 21:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, take as much time as you need. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

At least I do have some help with German politicians anyway. P.S. my god your talk page fills up fast. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Joint Flag signup: can I do it?

Can I use two flags for the WikiCup? The answer I got on the discussion page of the WikiCup was no help at all. Secret Saturdays (talk) 00:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not, but you'd probably be better off asking IMatthew (talk · contribs) or Garden (talk · contribs). –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe it can't work due to the use of the template {{flagicon}}. Shappy ^talk 00:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Outline Update - Basking in the light of knowledge - 07/28/2009

Phase two of outline integration (de-orphanizing outlines by adding links leading to them into article see also sections) is nearly complete. The better that outlines are integrated into the encyclopedia, the more use they will be to readers.

Due to greater exposure through outline integration, and with most of the OOK team on school summer vacation, development activity on outlines has increased a lot...

New members

Be sure to welcome our newest members to the team:

News: Outline of Palestine survives AfD

The outline was nominated for deletion for being too general in scope. The consensus was overwhelmingly for keeping it.

The most memorable comment was posted by Mandsford: I like the poetic name, anyway. [Outline of Palestine]. "Master Plan of Pakistan" and "Rough Sketch of Bangladesh" would be good too.

Special thanks to Tiamut for greatly improving the outline, and helping to save it from AfD.

To keep track of outline AfDs and other outline-related discussions, see WP:OOKDISC.

Who's active on Wikipedia this summer?

Courtesy of Rich Farmbrough, here's a list of editors by their edit counts over the previous month (8th June to 8th July).

It would be nice to get the most prolific Wikipedians involved with WP:WPOOK. If you can, find a good reason to contact one or more of them, and invite them to work on a relevant outline - or all 500!

Who's been up to what?

Buaidh, Highfields, and Gimme danger have been working on the government sections of the country outlines. Being that there are about 240 of these, with critical information being filled in on each, this is by far the hardest and most important chore of this WikiProject right now.
Penubag is working on a redesign of the top OOK page.
Tiamut has done an incredible job developing the Outline of Palestine.
And kudos also go to Eu.stefan for his work on Outline of Buddhism.

Thank you.

Here's what else has been going on...

New outlines

Recently created outlines include:

Recently converted to outlines

These outline articles, which were named "List of...", have been converted to an OOK format and added to the OOK:

Outline of the Vietnam War - was "List of Vietnam War-related topics" - TT
Outline of combinatorics - was "List of combinatorics topics" - converted by Minnecologies
Outline of category theory - was "List of category theory topics" converted by Minnecologies
Outline of scientific method - was "List of scientific method topics" - TT
Outline of ancient Rome - was "List of topics related to ancient Rome" - TT

Recently merged into outlines

There are a lot of "List of" articles that are outlines. Some of them are on the same subjects as the "Outline of" articles. The following articles have been recently merged into OOK pages:

List of finance topics into Outline of finance - TT
List of England-related topics into Outline of England - TT

Outlines that have been tagged: Tags are requests to fix a problem or improve an article in a particular way. Unless we want the tags to sit there for an extended period of time cluttering up the outlines (we don't), it is up to us to fulfill those requests or attend to underlying misassumptions (if any).

Outline of literature - tagged as Original research
Outline of ancient Greece - tagged as under construction
Outline of mathematics - tagged as in need of attention from an expert
Outline of arithmetic - tagged as not citing any references or sources.
Outline of immunology - tagged as an orphan
Outline of organic chemistry - tagged as an orphan
Outline of psychology - tagged as in need of attention from an expert on the subject
Outline of family and consumer science - tagged as an orphan
Outline of energy storage - tagged as an orphan
Outline of nuclear technology - tagged as an orphan
Outline of ergonomics - tagged as an orphan
Outline of construction - tagged as an orphan
Outline of machines - tagged as an orphan
Outline of free software - tagged as an orphan
Outline of design - tagged as containing original research or unverified claims, and needing references or sources
Outline of automobiles - tagged as an orphan

I can't stress enough the importance of watching

With so many outlines (now over 500), and a growing number of support pages (guidelines, wikiproject pages, etc.), I can no longer keep up. I need your help watching over it all.

If you'd like to omnisciently view everything "from above", see this page:

WP:OOKWL - watchlist for copying and pasting into your raw watchlist.

Or go to these pages (and click on "Related changes" in the sidebar's toolbox menu):

WP:OOKRC - a version of the above watchlist for use with "Related changes".
WP:OOKDIR - a list of key pages related to the OOK, along with their shortcuts.
WP:OOKDISC - list of discussions pertaining to outlines.

What's next?

There are a lot of contradictions in guidelines related to outlines. I'll be turning my attention to fixing those.

The number of "Outline of" articles is rapidly catching up to portals, and will probably pass them by the end of the summer!

Keep up the excellent work.

The Transhumanist 00:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

TYPO3

Thanx, Jules! --Orange Mike | Talk 01:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help! :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD and merger

Julian, would you mind taking a quick look at Beeblebrox's comment here? If he's right that this is a candidate for speedy close, could you close it before more comments stack up?- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 03:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

He is indeed correct, but as there are arguments for outright deletion, I think it would be inappropriate to speedy close it at this time. Probably best to wait and see if the nominator wants to withdraw. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

From the editor: Welcome to the build-your-own edition of the Signpost
Board elections: Board of Trustees elections draw 18 candidates for 3 seats
Wiki-Conference: Wikimedians and others gather for Wiki-Conference New York
Wikipedia Academy: Volunteers lead Wikipedia Academy at National Institutes of Health
News and notes: Things that happened in the Wikimedia world
Wikipedia in the news: Assorted news coverage of Wikipedia
Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
WikiProject report: WikiProject Oregon
Features and admins: Approved this week
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 10:51, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Withdrawal from Admin Coaching

Hello JC. I haven't got much time on the net so I'll make this message short. Due to certain real life problems, my time on Wikipedia will become (already has, actually) rather limited in the coming months. I will probably return some time later (September or October), but until then I'd like to withdraw from my admin coaching as its extremely unfair to deny someone else a coaching spot (especially with the huge admin coaching backlog). I'm really sorry for the inconvenience. Aditya (talk) 12:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem at all. Take as much time as you need to sort out any real life issues. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

We'll miss you. I hope everything works out OK

-- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 16:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Sears / Willis

Mikebarryrocks! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was blocked a couple of weeks ago for disruption elsewhere, and maybe he should be put on ice again for his unilaterally fooling around with the Sears / Willis thing. There is plenty of debate on the talk page, but none of the regular debaters has engaged in that kind of disruption, that I can recall. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll look into that. While there's no fast-paced move war, the article really shouldn't be moved again until there's solid consensus at the talk page, which is mainly why I move-protected it. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Even the most vociferous proponents of moving it back to the old name have essentially conceded that there is insufficient consensus for it. Mikebarry was simply taking it upon himself (based strictly on OR) to move the page back. I'm "assuming good faith", i.e. that he wasn't moving it back just to be purposely disruptive - although his having been blocked just 2 weeks ago, also for disruption elsewhere, undermines my "good faith" theory a bit. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

List of anthems of micronations

Hi JC. Could you move this article to my userspace por favor? ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure,

Done at User:ChildofMidnight/List of anthems of micronations. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:36, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much JC. Have a good one. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

NUTOPIA is also a microcosm of Lennon's sense of humor. It occurs to me that if someone invented a micronation within Micronesia, it could be MicroMicronesia. Then there was the nation of Amnesia, which has been largely forgotten. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

My subpage

I appreciate you taking the time to delete that for me. :) Best, Javert^{I knit sweaters, yo!} 17:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Timeline of the 1977 Pacific hurricane season

Hello, I feel that I fixed the last two things that you raised in your review of the article. Could you look at it when you have some time? --An ha mi rak 19:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Will revisit in the morning. Thanks for the notification. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons request

Where can I go to make a request for a picture? Secret Saturdays (talk) 22:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, not sure to be honest. You could ask at the Village Pump I suppose. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/-graphy (2nd nomination)

...has run to 7 days, and needs to be closed.

The Transhumanist 02:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It's actually got about 15 hours to go, if I'm reading it correctly. It's a pretty clear "no consensus", though, so it could probably be closed a bit earlier. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy delete

I don't see anything about the company on google, did I miss it? ^TheWeak_Willed 04:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

A7 is for deleting articles that make no claim of notability whatsoever; in this case, the article asserts that the company is "one of the major manufacturers of home appliances in Iran", which is sufficient to pass A7. You're correct in that there doesn't seem to be much Google coverage, but that should be discussed on the AfD. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

War FTP Daemon

I joined as I was looking for FTP Servers and referenced Wikipedia. I saw that War FTP Daemon was not on the list of FTP Servers and then there was no page for War FTP Daemon. I saw something about a reference that said it was not found after a google search. I believe that to be incorrect considering when I do a search for War FTP Daemon on google, the site that comes up first is the site for the software, warftp.org and I figured I would send this to you since you were mentioned on the article page for war ftp and it being deleted (Starkiler (talk) 06:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC))

That article was deleted via the proposed deletion process; the editor who nominated it cited a lack of notability and references to reliable sources. I'd be willing to restore it, however, if you feel this was in error. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I do feel it was an error considering the wayback machine has a link to the War FTP Daemon's author site since 1997, and it is now 2009 and this software is still available and the author of it still alive. Here is the link to the wayback machine site history http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.jgaa.com and here is a link about the serverwatch hall of fame arcticle http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-27632681_ITM which mentions the notable Apache_HTTP_Server. And the actual Server Watch Article http://www.serverwatch.com/stypes/servers/index.php/15947. The About.com artical http://compnetworking.about.com/od/ftpfiletransfer/tp/aatp_winftpserv.htm. Having used it since 1995 I think it has earned a small place at the very least. Starkiler (talk) 05:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

Fair enough, restored. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time. It is and old workhorse that has been around since mIRC. Thats a long time now I feel old. Starkiler (talk) 05:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

Deleted article: Vim-LaTeX

Hello! I tried to stop this article from being deleted, but I couldn't find any citations and due to the policy, it was deleted. But the short sentence I wrote: could I have it? Because I can't access the history of the deleted article? Or it's impossible to rescue some <1KB of text when it was deleted? Thanks for any help in advance. Kazkaskazkasako (talk) 08:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

A query about Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_21#Anybot.27s_algae_articles

This is nothing to do with the deletion of the above article - it's a minor tagging problem.

The AfD page mentioned has somewhere within it either a {{unreferenced}} (or equivalent tag) or [[Category:Articles_lacking_sources]].

As a result, it is showing up as an article lacking sources (as is the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_21 page, as it includes that article!)

As this is an archived discussion, is it possible for you to remove the reference that says it's unreferenced - I'm guessing someone mentioned this in the discussion, and used the tag rather than a non-wikified tag!

It's only a little thing, but it would make [[Category:Articles_lacking_sources]] look neater if this discussion wasn't there!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 11:54, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - however, the page Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_21 is still showing up on the [[Category:Articles_lacking_sources]] - but none of the pages for the discussions are... yet that page has no {{unref}} tags. Oh well... Thanks for removing that one anyway! -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 14:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It'll take a while for the servers to catch up; once they do so, the category should be removed from the log. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help - I know it's only a minor thing, but at least it's dealt with. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 15:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Aqualung (music player)

Hi, on June 3rd, 2009, the Wikipedia page about the Aqualung music player was deleted by you, because it was lacking notability and references. I was able to retrieve it (on AbsoluteAstronomy.com) and I found the article to be quite good. What kind of references are you looking for in an article about software ? Sorry, but the decision to delete this article is beyond me.

Coenen (talk) 13:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it was deleted via the proposed deletion process; the editor who nominated it cited a lack of notability and references to reliable sources. I'd be willing to restore it, however, if you feel this was in error. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Move request...

Australia-India relations needs an en dash. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

[7] Dash should be unspaced in blurb. Thanks again, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

AfDs

Hi - why are you closing AfDs like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ramiele Malubay as wP:SNOW? You do realise that every "Speedy Close" !voter has been summoned from the American Idol Wikiproject to vote? Some of these are notable - some of them probably aren't. Closing like this is going to prejudice any further AfD. Black Kite 15:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I've only closed the most obvious ones, where further discussion would be unproductive, perhaps even destructive. If you have evidence of canvassing, that would be concerning however. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm - I based that on this, but looking at it again ... meh. Thing is, there hasn't actually been any discussion. I don't object to you closing the obviously notable ones, but it'd be far less problematic if they were closed on their merits. Some of the ones you closed had Delete votes. This is another "Wikiproject determining notability of their own articles" issue, and this will only add fuel to their fire. Black Kite 15:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, none of the discussions I closed had any delete votes (a couple had "redirect" votes), but that's besides the point. The main problem is that, given the controversial/potentially disruptive manner in which the articles were nominated, it would be nearly impossible for a neutral, conclusive consensus to form, so it's better to nip the issue in the bud. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Apologies - I misread that because the nominator bolded Delete in all of his nominations. I think the point is valid, though. Black Kite 16:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Black Kite, I don't think you did your homework properly. I am not a member of the American Idol WikiProject, and never knew it existed. Suggesting that everyone that said speedy close was from there is a very inappropriate comment to make. At the end of the day, they are disruptive nominations and should all be closed immediately, and I strongly feel the person should be blocked. Jeni ^(talk) 16:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I corrected myself. I was pointing out that closing these AfDs as "Keep" rather than "Hang on, nominating all 38 of these in one go when some are clearly notable and some probably aren't might not be the best idea" could possibly cause problems when (and it will be when) some of them are nominated again in the future. Black Kite 16:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Request remove redirect

Please remove the redirect at Outline of rock music. (I've moved the page to WP:WPOOK draft space, where I should have created it in the first place).

The Transhumanist 16:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD on men's rights: suggesting an early close

Hi, Julian; I'm sorry to keep hitting you up for AFD requests, but it does seem to be your beat. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minister for Men (2nd nomination) has a day left to run, but it seems to me that we're headed toward a no-consensus close. With an eye on WP:SNOW, I think we should save ourselves time and bother, close the AFD now, and proceed directly to the merge process that appears to command consensus. Could you take a look, review my last comment on the page ([8]), and close the AFD if you agree with my take? - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 16:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I'm happy to help. :) Looking at that particular AfD, it seems deletion is pretty much out of the question; I think a "merge" closure would be appropriate. That said, it can't hurt to let it run the final day or so. It could probably be closed now, but people tend to get a bit upset if AfDs are closed early without a good reason (rightfully so). I'll keep an eye on it, however, and assuming no-one else gets to it first, I'll close it once we get closer to the seven-day mark. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Willis Tower

Noting that we are now at past 7 days into the RM discussion at Talk:Willis Tower#Requested move. As I commented in the section below the RM discussion (WGN-TV news), the nominator was an SPA that abandoned editing last Thursday and the other primary supporter of the move, Raime (talk · contribs) has conceded in his words: "there is clearly no consensus for a move back to "Sears Tower". What is the best way to close the discussion and move on from here, would you be able to do that? Sswonk (talk) 17:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It'd probably be best to ask at WP:AN for an uninvolved admin to close the discussion. I'd be happy to do so, but I have to run out in a few minutes, and I might be considered involved since I move-protected the article. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

1977 (Again)

Hello,

I removed the part about the SSHS from the alternate text. --An ha mi rak 17:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Hello, you probably know me as one of the admins on simple. I was wondering if you could help me out here, I'm not sure how to deal with this user. So, if you could help me it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Exert 18:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

User blocked for 12 hours for disruptive editing. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! You're of much help. Exert 21:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but he has undone the revert. If you want I can take this to ANI instead. Exert 23:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

We're working on...

...an award for Buaidh at User:Penubag/Sandbox3.

It's not done yet. Feel free to help improve it.

I'm hoping that everyone involved with the WP:WPOOK will sign it (please sign without a timestamp).

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 22:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Page move

Hi. The page for the television show How Not To Live Your Life is currently How Not to Live Your Life. Although normally on Wikipedia, words such as "to" should not be capitalised, the fact that the programme itself capitalises the "t" surely means the page should also capitalise the "t" in my opinion. It is also surely odd that the article with the exact page name matching the programme name is a redirect. As How Not To Live Your Life currently exists as a redirect, I need an admin to move the page. Can you help? Thanks, Alan16 (talk) 23:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC).

Moved. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Alan16 (talk) 02:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm afraid I have to disagree with the move. Our naming conventions advise not to capitalize the word "to" in infinitives, and we're supposed to use standard capitalization rules regardless of the trademark owner's preference. I'll start a move request if you like. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 05:53, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, can't say I was aware of that particular guideline. A move request seems like the most appropriate course of action at this point. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Opened here. I'll let Alan know about it as well so they can weigh in. Jafeluv (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I was actually just stopping by to let Julian know about the move request. Anyway, I've outline my response on the talk page. Also, I like how I am not more than one person (note the "they" in the above comment). Alan16 (talk) 13:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Closure

Thanks. I wasn't sure what to do there, but I would've felt worse if I opposed him and then closed it. Well I'll definitely remember next time. `Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, Apparently I did do that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I realized that I left half an answer on question one, so I went ahead and fixed it. Sorry about that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck with your RfA; though it seems unlikely to succeed this time around, you're receiving plenty of constructive criticism you can use to improve upon your editing skills in preparation for next time. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:49, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, that's what they said last time. Well I have another co-nom coming, I hope, so we'll see how that turns out. Also, could you alert Fastily to what I said as I am being blocked off his page (long story). Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the whole Admin coaching thing. It's good to see that someone isn't backed up with potential candidates. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Should I kill it early and ask for some intense coaching from you? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea Kevin. –xeno^talk 15:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:RfA

Hi Juliancolton. Yeah, actually, now that I read it over, that was very very mean. I was just surprised to see the user had never even heard of WP:AIV or WP:AN/I - but that of course doesn't justify any bitey comments. I'll see what I can do to fix the error. Thanks very much for pointing that out. Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

David Corbin

Trying to understand the deletion of this article after adding resources to strengthen. Can't find it in the deletion log. What do I do next?```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcompro (talk • contribs) 03:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB

I wanted to take a moment to delivery a personal thank you (not "thank spam" :)) for your involvement in my RfA. To have one of Wikipedia's most active and respected admins recommending for the position was truly an honor. I was quite surprised to learn that you had (apparently) watch listed my talk page and were already familiar with my activity and were considering nominating me. I was especially flatter by your description of me as "the model of a modern Wikipedian."

I also want to thank you for your offer of help anytime I may need it. I will surely take you up on that offer - like now for example... If I move a page that has some deleted revisions and some live ones will only the live ones be moved, leaving the deleted ones behind at the original location?

Thanks again, ThaddeusB (talk) 04:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

It was a pleasure to nominate you. :) Re. your question, I'm pretty sure you've got it right; the live edits would move to the new title, leaving any deleted revisions behind. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind a little post AfD clean up

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

LA If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 06:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Egzon Kuqi AfD

Morning Julian

Just a little drive-by message to say you were definitely right to close this AfD as a close. As you noted, there was a development, but I spent the best part of yesterday night trying to find more but I could't find anything outside that forum post to confirm it. It seems there are a couple of fully-professional teams in the league, but no confirmation on the entire league's status. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 06:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Good to hear, thanks!

–Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

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

LA @ 06:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC) LA If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 06:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

History merge

I fumbled a double page move yesterday and I believe I have left a small mess. This relates to the current page Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of rock music and the older, now redirected page User:Sswonk/Outline of rock music and their associated talk pages. Without going into details, there was a period of a couple of hours yesterday when The Transhumanist (talk · contribs · logs) was working at the former page and a group of three editors was working at the later. I merged them but did not request a history merge due to the warning at Wikipedia:How to fix cut-and-paste moves#Parallel versions. TT suggested that I ask you to look at and repair the problem, after which I will request speedy deletion of both of the subpages in my userspace (or you can delete them once you fix it). Sswonk (talk) 14:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Aitias

As you participated in the first RFC, I am informing you there is a second RFC on Aitias currently open. Majorly talk 16:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nachna Onedei Naei

Hey, since when are two admins needed to close a discussion? lol Hekerui (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, this revision is history. Hekerui (talk) 18:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

RE

That was vandalism IMO. It was removal of content and violation of policies.--WillC 20:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Wel I don't have Twinkle or Huggle or anything like that, even though I should, so I never can explain why I revert. I'll be more careful now. You probably understand what I mean when you just get use to doing something over and over. I see content removal, without looking at the computer screen I hit the revert button since I've done it over and over for the pasted year. My bad. Shorthand (IMO).--WillC 20:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I know, but ips tend to do more than one edit is what I'm referring to. I should have said that. When it comes to moves and explnations 9 out 10 times, there is a second edit.--WillC 20:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Timeline of the 1996 Atlantic hurricane season

Dylan620 needs help with the alt text, see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 1996 Atlantic hurricane season/archive1. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

SEWQ RfB

Good luck – let me know if you pass! :D --Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 02:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)